Response to Intervention RTI IDEAS Conference

1
Response to Intervention (RTI)IDEAS Conference

• Tonya Middling
• Learning Improvement Coordinator
• OSPI, Special Education
• February 2008

2
Purpose

• Part I To provide an overview of RTI systems
  and discuss how it aligns with other Federal,
  State and Local Initiatives
• Part II To discuss related state regulations for
  use of RTI in specific learning disability
  determinations
• Part III To provide an overview of the Stages
  of Implementation
• Part IV To review step-by-step practical
  strategies for applying RTI on a district or
  school wide basis

3
Part I RTI Overview

• Define RTI
• Background and research
• Review core principles of an RTI system

4
What is RTI?

• RTI is the practice of (1) providing
  high-quality instruction/intervention matched to
  student needs and (2) using learning rate over
  time and level of performance to (3) make
  important educational decisions to guide
  instruction
• National Association of State Directors of
  Special Education, 2005

5
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 Student
  intervention outcomes drive decision making at
  every tier. Decisions about intensity and
  duration of interventions are based upon data
  across multiple tiers of intervention.

6
RTI Big Ideas

• RTI is a general education approach that
• aligns resources from general, remedial and
  special education through a multi-tiered
• service delivery model in order to provide
  scientific, research-based interventions to
  struggling students.
• Can be applied in all academic areas and behavior
• RTI is optional

7
Background and Research Support

• Stan Denos data-based decision program
  modification model (Deno, 1985 Deno Mirkin,
  1977)
• John Bergans behavioral consultation model
  (Bergan, 1977)
• Sharon Vaughn's 3-Tier Model
• Nearly all of the RTI models being implemented
  today include features drawn from all three of
  these models.
• Resource NASDSEs Policy Considerations and
  Implications for Implementation

8
Background and Research Support Why RTI?

• RTI identifies specific skill deficits, whereas
  teacher referrals are more frequently general
  statements of need
• Scientifically-based interventions are used more
  frequently and earlier
• Over identification based on race/ethnicity is
  reduced in programs for students with learning
  disabilities and mental retardation
• African-American children are twice as likely as
  white children to be labeled mentally retarded
  and more likely to be label EBD

9
Why RTI? continued

• Greater numbers of at-risk students achieve
  benchmarks
• Principals and superintendents want to know if
  students are achieving benchmarks, regardless of
  placement in general education, gifted, or
  special education
• SLD category has grown 300 since 1976-80 there
  because they havent learned how to read 40
  there because they havent been taught to read.

10
Effectiveness of LD Programs based on Discrepancy
Model

• Special education placements tend to stabilize
  the reading growth of students with reading
  disabilities rather than accelerate it. (Vaughn,
  1998, Moody, 2000)
• The change in acceleration rates for students
  with reading disabilities is about .04 SD/year.
  It will take 8 years to move from 5th to 9th
  percentile (Torgeson, in press Hanushek, 1998)
• Students who enter special educaiton2 years
  below age mates can be expected to maintain
  disparity or fall farther behind.
• Its the nature of the program more than the
  label that makes the difference.

11
RTI Manual Introduction

• 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

12
How to use the RTI manual

• Recommendations NOT regulations
• Each district and school design their own RTI
  system built on existing practices and available
  resources
• The RTI manual aligns with OSPIs K-12 Reading
  Model-Should be familiar with both models

13
Use all available resources to teach all
students

• RTI practices are built on the belief that all
  students can learn and everyone supports all
  students
• Districts need to review existing initiatives to
  determine where RTI can complement and/or help
  unify efforts already in place.
• Basic Education
• LAP/Title 1
• Reading First (NCLB, 2001)
• School Improvement /Student Learning Plans
• Special Education (IDEA 2004)
• K-12 Reading Model

14
Features of a Multi-Tiered Model

• Each tier represents increasingly intense level
  of services associated with increasing levels of
  learner needs
• The nature of the academic or behavioral
  intervention changes at each tier, becoming more
  rigorous as the student moves through the tiers
• Students move up and down the tiers depending on
  need

15
Features of a Multi-Tiered Model
16
Tier I Core Instruction ALL Students

• All students receive high quality scientific,
  research based instruction in the core curriculum
  in all areas
• Core curriculum provides the foundation for
  instruction upon which all strategic and
  intensive interventions are formulated
• Meets the needs of all students, is
  differentiated and culturally responsive
• Research demonstrates approximately 80-90 of
  students respond to high quality, research-based
  core instruction

17
Tier 1 Universal Screening

• Universal screening is conducted in all academic
  areas and behavior at least three times/year
• Purpose is to identify students at risk for
  academic or behavior failure
• Universal screening data tells us whether a
  student is on track compared to peer group and/or
  state standards
• The students data at benchmark testing periods
  can be utilized to validate the effectiveness of
  intervention. Is the gap closing?
• Need procedures to identify which students are
  proficient (80) and which are deficient (20).
• Procedures will lead to data for decision making
  about
• How to create instructional change for ALL
• Which students need additional intervention

18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
Activity 1 Tier I Discussion

• What does Tier I currently look like in your
  schools relative to universal screening, progress
  monitoring, and instruction and interventions?
• What methods are in place to ensure the fidelity
  of implementation of core programs?

21
Tier II Strategic Interventions Some Students

• Strategic interventions supplement instruction to
  students who are not achieving standards through
  the core curriculum alone
• Consists of 5-10 of the student body
• Occurs in small groups of 3-6 students
• Short-term in duration 9-12 week blocks
• Recommended 3-4 sessions per week at 30-60
  minutes per session
• Students progress is monitored more frequently at
  Tier II, usually every 2 weeks

22
Strategic Interventions, cont.

• Students may receive more than one block of Tier
  II interventions if progressing but have not yet
  reached the goal
• Students who reach goal should return to Tier I
  and continue 5 weeks of progress monitoring to
  ensure he/she does not fall below benchmark
• Students who do not progress in Tier II may
  require more intensive interventions

23
Progress Monitoring

• Documents student growth over time to determine
  if students are learning critical skills at an
  adequate rate
• CBMs are primarily used as a method for progress
  monitoring because they are brief, easy to
  administer and score, and are good predictors of
  student ability
• Progress monitoring data provide a picture of the
  students performance and rate of growth to
  inform instructional and curricular changes so
  that every student reaches proficiency on
  targeted skills

24
How do you determine students at risk and how do
you set targets?

• Use aggregate tables, when available
• Use decision rules

25
Using Data to Inform Instruction -Retrievable
at AIMSweb.com
26
Using Data to Inform Instruction -Retrievable
at AIMSweb.com
27
Activity 2 Using Aggregate Tables

• Using the aggregate table, with a partner, for
  Grade 5 and 6 identify
• Winter benchmark levels within the 50th-75th
  v
• Number of students in the spring sample
  v
• The ROI for the 25th percentile
  v
• ROI FormulaROI is the spring score fall score
  (or winter fall) divided by 36 weeks (or 18
  weeks, depending on the number of instructional
  weeks).
• Calculate the ROI needed for a 7th grade student
  performing at 17 correct digits per minute to
  move to 35 correct digits per minute.
• Num Number of students
• CD correct digits per minute
• ROI Rate of improvement.

28
Words Read Correct
X
X
X
29
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Words Read Correct
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
30
Activity 3 Tier II Discussion

• Guiding questions
• What does Tier II currently look like in your
  schools relative to progress monitoring and
  strategic interventions?
• What methods are in place to ensure the fidelity
  of Tier II interventions?

31
Diagnostic/Targeted Assessment

• Diagnostic/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.
• Usually conducted when student enters Tier III,
  but may be conducted earlier
• Reading Diagnostic Assessment Matrix
  http//www.k12.wa.us/CurriculumInstruct/Reading/de
  fault.aspx

32
Tier III Intensive Interventions Few Students

• Designed to accelerate a students rate of
  learning by increasing the frequency and duration
  of individualized interventions based on targeted
  assessment data.
• Students performing significantly below standards
  and have not responded to Tier I or Tier II
  interventions
• Progress is monitored at least weekly

33
Tier III Intensive Interventions Few Students,
cont.

• Consists of less than 5 of student body
• Occurs in groups of no more than 3 ideally
• May occur longer than 9-12 weeks
• Students who are successful at Tier III return to
  Tier I with Tier II support
• If not successful at Tier III, consider referral
  for special education and/or other long-term
  planning 504 plan, additional Tier III cycle

34
Activity 4 Tier III Discussion

• Guiding questions
• What does Tier III currently look like in your
  schools regarding progress monitoring,
  diagnostic/targeted assessments and tier III
  interventions?
• Who delivers intensive interventions and when
  does it occur?
• What methods are in place to ensure fidelity of
  tier III interventions?

35
Data Management for Assessment System

• Technical Support
• How will you track assessment data and who has
  access to this data?
• Who will be responsible for maintaining the data?

36
Data-Based Decision Making

• The purpose of using data based decision making
  is to find the best instructional approach for a
  student with an academic or behavioral problem
• Decisions should be made by a team using a
  combination of the a) problem solving process
  and/or b) standard protocol approach

37
a) Problem Solving

• What is problem solving?
• A process that uses the skills of professionals
  from different disciplines to develop and
  evaluate intervention plans that significantly
  improve the school performance of students
• The composition of the team will vary by adding
  additional specialists expertise as students
  move from tier to tier, and includes the parent
• The process provides teachers with the skill to
  IDENTIFY and ARTICULATE any area of concern. It
  is based on the premise that problems must be
  able to be measured and tracked with data.

38
Scientific Method The Problem Solving Process
39
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
40
Content Domains of Influence
41
Apply R.I.O.T. procedures to each of the content
domains
42
b) Standard Treatment Protocol

• The words standard (consistent, the same for all
  students), treatment (instruction, intervention),
  and protocol (predetermined format or delivery
  system) describe this approach to RTI.
• STP uses one validated intervention, to improve
  the academic skills of its struggling students.
  Because a single, consistent intervention is
  used, it is easier to ensure accurate
  implementation, or treatment fidelity.
• A variety of support staff (such as paras,
  tutors, or parent volunteers) can deliver the
  instruction however, critical that they receive
  comprehensive training before assuming their
  instructional responsibilities.

43
Activity 5 Decision Making/ Teaming

• Guiding questions
• Does your school have an intervention team(s)
  designed to support teachers and other staff in
  problem-solving around academic and behavioral
  issues for struggling students?
• What does decision making look like in your
  school?
• Do your teams use a set of decision rules or
  protocols that guide its decision-making?
• Are the right people participating in decisions
  at the right time?

44
Fidelity

• Fidelity refers to the degree to which RTI
  components are implemented as designed, intended,
  and planned.
• Fidelity is achieved through sufficient time
  allocation, adequate intervention intensity,
  qualified and trained staff, and sufficient and
  sufficient materials and resources.
• Fidelity is vital in universal screening,
  instructional delivery and progress monitoring.

45
Same players new roles

• The New Psychologist Role
• The New Sped Teacher Role
• The New Parent Role
• The New General Ed.Teacher Role
• The New Principal Role

46
Part II Regulation Process

• Part B of IDEA 2004 signed into law-Dec. 3, 2004
  went into effect July 1, 2005
• OSPI formed 5 taskforce committees-July 2005
• Aug. 14, 2006, OSEP published federal regulations
  to implement Part B of IDEA
• Federal Regulations took effect Oct 13, 2006.
• OSPI adopted final state regulations (Chapter
  392-172A) on June 29, 2007.
• State regulations took effect on July 30, 2007.
• SLD regulations are found at Chapter
  392-172A-03045 through 392-172A-03080

46
47
Evaluating Students for Disability

• The information in this training does not include
  all there is to know about IDEAs provisions for
  evaluation
• The provisions discussed in this training are in
  addition to those separately examined in the
  evaluation procedures found under 392-172A-03005
  through -03040
• An evaluation to identify whether or not a
  student has a SLD must adhere to the requirements
  described in the evaluation procedures.

This presentation is based, in part, upon
NICHCY's IDEA 2004 Training Curriculum
47
47
48
Opening Activity (5 minutes)

• What do you already know about SLD and the
  process for which a specific learning disability
  is identified?

48
48
49
Purpose

• This part of the training will review
• The definition of specific learning
  disabilities and
• Additional provisions for the identification of
  students with specific learning disabilities.

49
49
50
Our Evolving Understanding of SLD

• IDEA 2004 did not change the definition of SLD,
  however new language in section 614(b)(6)
  represents the first change in 30 years in how
  States may determine the existence of a SLD.
• Our understanding of SLD will continue to evolve
  as more research emerges.
• Meanwhile, RTI is optional.

50
50
51
Definition of SLD

• WAC 392-172A-01035(2)(k)
• Specific learning disability means a disorder in
  one or more of the basic psychological processes
  involved in understanding or in using language,
  spoken or written

51
51
52
Definition of SLD

• May manifest itself in the imperfect ability to
• listen
• think
• speak
• read
• write
• spell or
• do mathematical calculations

52
52
53
Definition of SLD

• including conditions such as
• perceptual disabilities
• brain injury
• minimal brain dysfunction
• dyslexia and
• developmental aphasia
• that adversely affects a student's educational
  performance.

53
53
54
Definition of SLD

• Specific learning disability does not include
  learning problems that are primarily the result
  of
• visual, hearing, or motor disabilities
• mental retardation
• emotional disturbance or
• environmental, cultural, or economic
  disadvantage.

54
54
55
Determining SLD

• Additional Procedures for Identifying Students
  with Specific Learning Disabilities
• 392-172A-03045  District procedures for specific
  learning disabilities
• 392-172A-03050  Additional members of the
  evaluation group
• 392-172A-03055  Specific learning
  disability Determination
• 392-172A-03060  Process based on a student's
  response to scientific research-based
  intervention

55
55
56
Determining SLD

• 392-172A-03065  Use of discrepancy tables for
  determining severe discrepancy
• 392-172A-03070  Method for documenting severe
  discrepancy
• 392-172A-03075  Observation of students
  suspected of having a specific learning
  disability
• 392-172A-03080  Specific documentation for the
  eligibility determination of students
  suspected of having specific learning
  disabilities

56
56
57
300.307 Specific Learning Disabilities

• A State must adopt criteria for determining
  whether a child has an SLD as defined in IDEA.
  Criteria
• Must not require the use of a severe discrepancy
  between intellectual ability and achievement for
  determining whether a child has a SLD
• Must permit the use of a process based on the
  childs response to scientific, research-based
  intervention
• May permit the use of other alternative
  research-based procedures for determining a child
  has SLD.
• A public agency must use the State criteria in
  determining whether a child has a SLD.

57
57
58
A Closer Look at 300.307

• NEW
• Must not require the use of a severe discrepancy
  between intellectual ability and achievement for
  determining whether a child has a SLD
• What is a severe discrepancy model?
• What major concerns exists with the discrepancy
  model?

58
58
59
Developing Consensus

• LD Summit-Aug. 2001
• Reviewed OSEP commissioned white papers and
  response papers to begin a discussion about using
  current SLD research findings
• LD Roundtable-Oct.-Nov. 2001
• Continued discussion based on latest research
  findings
• SLD Finding Common Ground Report-July 2002
• Identified 25 consensus statements in 5
  categories
• Retrievable at
• http//www.nrcld.org/resource_kit/tools/SLDOvervie
  w2007.pdf

59
59
60
Developing Consensus, cont.

• PCESE 2002 Major Recommendations
• Focus on results (results-oriented)
• Embrace a model of prevention (RTI) not a model
  of failure (IQ/achievement)
• Consider students with disabilities as general
  education students first

60
61
A Closer Look at 300.307

• NEW
• Must permit the use of a process based on the
  childs response to scientific, research-based
  intervention
• What is RTI?
• How has RTI come to intersect with IDEA?
• May States Exclude RTI from Their Criteria?

61
61
62
What is RTI?

• RTI is the practice of (1) providing
  high-quality instruction/intervention matched to
  student needs and (2) using learning rate over
  time and level of performance to (3) make
  important educational decisions to guide
  instruction
• National Association of State Directors of
  Special Education, 2005

62
63
A Closer Look at 300.307

• NEW
• May permit the use of other alternative
  research-based procedures for determining a child
  has SLD.
• What are Other Alternative Research-Based
  Procedures?
• How Are Research-Based Procedures Defined?

63
63
64
State Adopted SLD Procedures

• WAC 392-172A-03045 
• Districts must develop procedures for the
  identification of SLD which may include
• A severe discrepancy between intellectual ability
  and achievement or
• A process based on a students response to
  scientific, research-based intervention or
• A combination of both.
• Note Districts are not required to use severe
  discrepancy.

64
64
65
Group Determining SLD

• WAC 392-172A-03045
• Determination of SLD is made by the students
  parents and a group of qualified professionals
  which must include
• Students general education classroom teacher or
• If the student does not have a general education
  classroom teacher, a general education classroom
  teacher qualified to teach a student of his or
  her age or
• For a student of less than school age, an
  individual qualified to teach a student of his or
  her age and
• 
  

65
66
Group Determining SLD

• At least one individual qualified to conduct
  individual diagnostic examinations of students,
  such as
• school psychologist
• speech language pathologist, or
• remedial reading teacher.

66
67
Determining SLD

• WAC 392-172A-03055(1)
• Factors involved
• Students achievement levels in 1 (or more) of 8
  specified areas
• Oral expression
• Listening comprehension
• Written expression
• Basic reading skill
• Reading fluency skills NEW
• Reading comprehension
• Mathematics calculation
• Mathematics problem solving.

67
68
Determining SLD

• WAC 392-172A-03055(2)(a)
• The group may determine the student has a SLD if
  the student
• Does not achieve adequately for the students age
  or meet the states grade level standards when
  provided with learning experiences and
  instruction appropriate for the students age in
  one or more of the 8 areas
• When using RTI, or
• The group finds the student has a severe
  discrepancy
  and

68
69
Determining SLD

• WAC 392-172A-03055(2)(b)
• The group may also consider whether the student
  exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in
  performance, achievement, or both, relative to
• age
• state grade level standards, or
• intellectual development
• that is determined to be relevant to the
  identification of SLD and

69
70
Determining SLD

• WAC 392-172A-03055(3)
• The group determines its findings are not
  primarily the result of
• A visual, hearing, or motor disability
• Mental retardation
• Emotional disturbance
• Cultural factors
• Environmental or economic disadvantage or
• Limited English proficiency.

70
71
Putting It Together
Three ?s Needed to Determine SLD
? and ? and ?
71
72
The group may determine a student has a SLD if-
72
73
Determining SLD

• WAC 392-172A-03055(4)
• To ensure a students underachievement is not due
  to lack of appropriate instruction in reading or
  math
• Group must consider data in 2 areas
• Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as a part
  of, the referral process, the student was
  provided appropriate instruction in general
  education settings, delivered by qualified
  personnel and

73
74
Determining SLD

• Data-based documentation of repeated assessment
  of achievement at reasonable intervals
• This documentation
• Reflects formal assessment of student progress
  during instruction
• Was provided to the students parents.

74
75
Determining SLD

• WAC 392-172A-03055(5)
• The district must promptly request parental
  consent to evaluate the student to determine if
  the student needs special education and related
  services, and must adhere to the time frames for
  an initial evaluation under WAC 392-172A-03005
• If, prior to the referral, a student has not made
  adequate progress after an appropriate period of
  time when provided instruction, as described in
  (4) (a) and (b) or
• Whenever a student is referred for an evaluation.

75
76
Time frames

• WAC 392-172A-03005
• The district must adhere to time frames for
  initial evaluation
• 35 school days after the date written consent for
  evaluation has been provided or
• 35 school days after the date the refusal of the
  parent is obtained by agreement through
  mediation, or overridden by due process
  procedures or
• Such other time period as may be agreed to by the
  parent and documented by the school district,
  including specifying the reasons for extending
  the timeline.

76
77
Process based on a students response to
scientific, research-based intervention NEW

• WAC 392-172A-03060(1) Districts using RTI for
  SLD shall adopt procedures that include the
  following
• (a) Universal screening and/or benchmarking at
  fixed intervals at least three times throughout
  the school year
• (b) A high quality core curriculum designed to
  meet the instructional needs of all students
• (c) Scientific research-based interventions as
  defined in WAC 392-172A-01165 are identified for
  use with students needing additional instruction
• (d) Scientific research-based interventions used
  with a student are appropriate for the student's
  identified need and are implemented with
  fidelity

77
78
Process based on a students response to
scientific, research-based intervention NEW

• WAC 392-172A-03060(1)
• (e) A multi-tiered model is developed for
  delivering both the core curriculum and strategic
  and intensive scientific research-based
  interventions in the general education setting
• (f) Frequent monitoring of individual student
  progress occurs in accordance with the constructs
  of the multi-tiered delivery system implemented
  in the school consistent with the intervention
  and tier at which it is being applied and
• (g) Decision making using problem solving or
  standard treatment protocol techniques is based
  upon, but not limited to, student centered data
  including the use of curriculum based measures,
  available standardized assessment data, intensive
  interventions, and instructional performance
  level.

78
78
79
Procedures for using RTI

• WAC 392-172A-03060 (2) (a) and (b)
• Procedures must be designed to establish
• The students general education core curriculum
  instruction provided the student the opportunity
  to increase her or his rate of learning
• Two or more intensive scientific research-based
  interventions, identified to allow the student to
  progress toward his or her improvement targets,
  were implemented with fidelity and for a
  sufficient duration to establish that the
  students rate of learning using did not
  increase or allow the student to reach the
  targets identified for the student

79
80
Procedures for using RTI

• WAC 392-172A-03060 (2) (c)
• The duration of intensive scientific,
  research-based interventions that were
  implemented was long enough to gather sufficient
  data points below the students aim line to
  demonstrate student response for each of the
  interventions through progress monitoring to
  determine the effectiveness of the interventions.
  

80
81
Guidelines to Assist Districts in Developing the
Procedures

• WAC 392-172A-03060(3)
• Refers districts to the RTI manual for
  recommended guidelines when writing procedures
  for using RTI for SLD identification.

81
82
Retained the Discrepancy Tables and Methods for
Documenting Severe Discrepancy

• WAC 392-172A-03065 and -03070
• No Changes
• http//www.k12.wa.us/SpecialEd/pubdocs/LD_Tables.p
  df

82
83
Observation in SLD Determination

• WAC 392-172A-03075
• Districts must ensure
• The student is observed in students learning
  environment, including the general education
  classroom setting, to document academic
  performance and behavior in the areas of
  difficulty.
• Why is Observation Necessary?

83
83
84
Observation in SLD Determination

• If pre-referral observation is not used, member
  of evaluation group must observe in general
  education classroom after consent is obtained.
• For pre-school students or students who are not
  in school, observation must be in an appropriate
  environment for students of that age.

84
85
Documentation for SLD Eligibility

• WAC 392-172A-03080
• For RTI, the evaluation report must contain a
  statement of
• The instructional strategies used and the
  student-centered data collected consistent with
  the districts RTI procedures and
• The students parents were notified about
• State and school district policies regarding the
  amount and nature of student performance data
  that would be collected and the general education
  services that would be provided
• Strategies for increasing the students rate of
  learning and
• The parents right to request an evaluation.

85
86
All SLD evaluations must include data regarding
appropriate instruction in reading and math

• Data that demonstrates 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, which was provided to the
  parents

86
86
87
Early Intervening Services and NCLB

• a LEA may use up to 15 of its federal IDEA Part
  B funding to develop and implement coordinated,
  early intervening servicesfor students in
  kindergarten through grade 12 (with a particular
  emphasis on students in kindergarten through
  grade 3) who have not been identified as needing
  special education or related services but who
  need additional academic and behavioral support
  to succeed in the general education environment
  P.L. 108-446, 613(f)(1).
• Aligns with No Child Left Behind (2001)

88
EIS

• Early Intervening Services are
• Activities to support students in grades K-12
  who are not currently identified as needing
  special education, but who need additional
  academic and behavioral support to succeed in
  the general education curriculum
• Districts may not use more than 15 of IDEA Part
  B funds for EIS activities, less any amount
  reduced by MOE
• WAC 392-172A-06085
• Appendix D (Relationship of EIS to MOE)

89
EIS Allowable Activities

• EIS activities may include
• Professional development for teachers and other
  school staff to enable such personnel to deliver
  scientifically based academic and behavioral
  interventions
• Instruction on use of adaptive and instructional
  software and
• Educational and behavioral evaluations, services
  and supports

90
Significant Disproportionality

• States must require LEAs to reserve maximum
  amount of EIS funds to address any issues of
  significant disproportionate representation of
  minority students in special education
• WAC 392-172A-07040(3)

91
Understanding Implementation and Sustaining
Change
Part III Stages of Implementation
92
Thoughts on Implementation

• I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways
  that won't work.
• -Thomas A. Edison

93
What Doesnt WorkImplementation The Missing
Link Between Research and Practice, Fixsen et al.

• Dissemination of information by itself
• Training alone, no matter how well done
• Implementation by edict
• Following the money
• Implementation without changing supporting roles
  and functions

94
Stages of ImplementationImplementation The
Missing Link Between Research and Practice,
Fixsen et al.

• Take 2-4 years
• Often non-linear
• Stages impact each other
• Staff turnover impacts implementation

95
Stages of ImplementationImplementation The
Missing Link Between Research and Practice,
Fixsen et al.

• Exploration
• Installation
• Initial Implementation
• Full Implementation
• Innovation
• Sustainability

96
Exploration (6-15 months)Implementation The
Missing Link Between Research and Practice,
Fixsen et al.

• Also called pre-contemplation
• Dissemination of information
• Question generating
• What problem exists?
• What innovations exist?
• What changes must be made?
• Implementation team formed
• Purveyor group formed

97
Installation (2-6 months)Implementation The
Missing Link Between Research and Practice,
Fixsen et al.

• Begins with decision to implement
• Ends when innovation is used for first time
• May require new staff
• Takes cash

98
Initial Implementation (9-24 months)Implementatio
n The Missing Link Between Research and
Practice, Fixsen et al.

• Where the rubber meets the road
• Bumps expected
• Stage when innovation often falls apart
• Experience of purveyor group may be helpful

99
Full Implementation (2-4 years)Implementation
The Missing Link Between Research and Practice,
Fixsen et al.

• Reached when 50 of practitioners perform their
  new functions w/ fidelity
• Impacted by turnover of practitioners,
  administrators, and purveyor group
• New staff must be trained, coached, and checked
  for fidelity
• Often Utopian

100
Innovation Implementation The Missing Link
Between Research and Practice, Fixsen et al.

• First do it right, then do it differently
• Learn the system
• Do it with fidelity
• Sustain it long enough to learn the nuances
• Make it better

101
SustainabilityImplementation The Missing Link
Between Research and Practice, Fixsen et al.

• Fidelity!
• Must build local capacity
• Never-ending

102
Effects of Training and Coaching
103
(No Transcript)
104
Part IV District / School Response to
Intervention Blueprint

• 3 Phases of Implementation
• Consensus Building (Commitment)
• Infrastructure Development
• Implementation

105
Sowhat is consensus building?

• A process
• Shows people precisely what is being proposed and
  why
• Gets everyone on the same page
• Gives people time to explore and ask questions
• Open, honest, accurate
• Done well, the result is commitment and buy-in

106
Big Ideas on Consensus Building

• Both the WHAT and the WHY have to be taught
• Multiple rationales must be provided
• Preferably by different people
• Some people connect with some but not others
• No arguments connect with everyone
• Some arguments connect with most people
• Use them all, but use what you know about your
  schools

107
Strategies for building consensus

• District/School Blueprint
• ACTION 1
• Develop an action plan to facilitate the sharing
  of information and the building of district-wide
  consensus to support RTI
• Step 1
• Develop an Action Plan to identify stakeholders
  in the district, share information, and gain
  consensus to support RTI

108
District/School Blueprint

• ACTION 2
• Provide information to internal and external
  stakeholders about RTI
• Step 1
• Provide information about RTI practices
• Include educational activities that contain
  information on the following
• Definition of RTI
• Components of RTI
• Research on RTI
• Benefits of implementing RTI
• Barriers to implementing RTI
• Etc.

109
District/School Blueprint

• Step 2
• Establish the rationale for district adoption of
  RTI practices
• Demonstrate how RTI systematically connects to
  NCLB, IDEA, and other federal and state
  regulations
• Demonstrate how RTI is interdependent with
  existing district goals, mission, priorities, and
  initiatives
• Demonstrate the potential impact on district
  level values and beliefs

110
District/School Blueprint

• Step 3
• Identify internal and external partners who have
  a vested interest in RTI
• Wisdom from the field
• Build momentum for RTI by collaborating with
  other groups in seeking legislative support
• Be cautious about accepting outside funding if it
  is not targeted to the focus of core principles
  of RTI

111
District/School Blueprint

• Step 4
• Develop a communication plan. Identify who will
  provide the information, how the information will
  be share, and when the information will be
  communicated
• Wisdom from the field
• People from different departments should present
  to staff
• C I personnel are essential in all aspects of
  consensus building
• Keep the presentation simple

112
District/School Blueprint

• Step 4, cont.
• WISDOM FROM THE FIELD
• Step 1-Use your district org chart
• Step 2- Define roles/expectations of departments
  in your RTI efforts/Job descriptions
• Step 3- Know how decisions are made and how
  leadership and accountability is monitored
  (District evaluation procedures or protocol)

113
District/School Blueprint

• Step 4-Examine current initiatives within each
  leadership role and responsibility that can
  support consensus building and infrastructure
• Step 5-
• Be sure to know what resources exist in the
  district and parameters for spending
• Look at current funding sources and the
  opportunity to commingle funds to meet targets
  and goals of initiative
• Step 6- This may be a cabinet level decision
  (superintendent and executive staff)

114
RTI General Education Policy and Procedures

• Developed with WSSDA
• Capture Chapter 392-172A RTI requirements
• Provided as a model, may be modified to meet
  district needs
• Available on OSPI RTI website

115
Wrap Up Tough Realities

• RTI requires behavior change on the part of the
  adults (teachers, ESA staff, administrators)
• RTI requires that we frame every instructional
  problem in terms of variables that the teacher
  controls
• RTI requires everyone to own the results for all
  kids

116
Tough Realities, cont.

• 4. We have to expand the range of instructional
  options (amount and intensity) available to all
  kids
• 5. To get it done, you will have to allocate ALL
  of your PD time for 2 to 3 years (maybe longer)
  on getting RTI going and supporting it.
• 6. You WILL have to change your master schedule
  to accommodate supplemental teaching

117
Tough Realities, cont.

• 7. People who do not have a history of working
  together and collaborating will have to begin
  doing so
• 8. Staff MUST have a deep understanding of
  assessment-WHYS and HOWS
• 9. Staff MUST have a deep understanding of
  curriculum (the essential components of reading)
  and effective instruction
• 10. Motivation is key!

118
RESOURCES

• What Works Clearinghouse http//ies.ed.gov/ncee/w
  wc/
• Best Evidence Encyclopedia http//www.bestevidenc
  e.org/
• OSPI RTI Website http//www.k12.wa.us/SpecialEd/R
  TI.aspx
• National Research Center for Learning
  Disabilities www.nrcld.org/
• Center on Instruction http//www.centeroninstruct
  ion.org
• National Center on Student Progress Monitoring
  http//www.studentprogress.org
• National Center on Response to Intervention
• http//www.rti4success.org

119
Thank You!
Tonya Middling Coordinator, Learning
Improvement Tonya.middling_at_k12.wa.us