Eligibility decisions within a response to intervention framework
Download
1 / 116

Eligibility Decisions Within a Response to Intervention Framework - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Eligibility Decisions Within a Response to Intervention Framework Presented by: Robert Pasternack, Ph.D., Senior Vice President Cambium Learning Group Kim Gibbons, Ph.D., Executive Director St.Croix River Education District

Related searches for Eligibility Decisions Within a Response to Intervention Framework

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha

Download Presentation

Eligibility Decisions Within a Response to Intervention Framework

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Eligibility Decisions Within a Response to Intervention Framework

Presented by:

Robert Pasternack, Ph.D., Senior Vice President

Cambium Learning Group

Kim Gibbons, Ph.D., Executive Director

St.Croix River Education District


Number of students with disabilities in U.S. and outlying areas, age 6-21


Overview of Session

  • Describe the research base supporting the use of an RtI framework.

  • Describe critical elements of the RtI framework used at the St. Croix River Education District.

  • Share data documenting success of framework

  • Describe how the framework is used to make entitlement decisions through the use of a case study.


U.S. Public School Enrollment

& Special Services

All Students

49.5 Million

Special Education Services

6.6 Million

Title 1 Services

16.5 Million

English Language Services

3.9 Million


Prevention of Special Education

  • President’s Commission (2002) Values and Outcomes:

  • Efficacy of special education is not universally documented—lowered expectations, reduced academic pressure

  • Later educational opportunities typically are better if learning and behavior problems can be resolved in early grades

  • Probable later career opportunities are better if students can complete general education programs

  • Prevention and early intervention enhance positive outcomes and expand educational and career opportunities

Reschly SLD Identification


Definition of Response to Intervention

  • High-quality instruction/intervention is defined as instruction or intervention, matched to student need, that has been demonstrated through scientific research and practice to produce high learning rates for most students

  • Learning rate and level of performance are the primary sources of information used in ongoing decision-making.

  • Important educational decisions about intensity and likely duration of interventions are based on individual student response to instruction across multiple tiers of intervention.

NASDSE, 2005


Response to Instruction (RTI)

Few

Some

All


Response to Instruction (RTI)

Students successfully receiving scientifically-based instruction

Students successful receiving intensive research-based services

Most

Intensive


Core RtI Principles

  • We can effectively teach all children

  • Intervene early

  • Use a multi-tier model of service delivery

  • Use problem-solving method to make decisions within a multi-tier model

  • Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions/ instruction to the extent available

  • Monitor student progress to inform instruction

  • Use data to make decisions. A data-based decision regarding student intervention is central to RtI practices

  • Use assessment for three different purposes:

    • screening applied to all children

    • diagnostics

    • Progress monitoring

NASDSE, 2005


  • This is a “process” that will take time

  • RtI is more about general education than special education

  • RtI is a component of problem-solving, not an independent process

  • “Response”-data based

  • “Intervention”-evidence-based

  • Strong basis in statute and rule


Changes in Legal RequirementsIDEA (2004)

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 607(b), when determining whether a child has a specific learning disability as defined in section 602, a local educational agency shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning.

Reschly SLD Identification


Response to Intervention (IDEA, 2004)

  • ‘‘(B) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY.—In deter- mining whether a child has a specific learning disability, a local educational agency may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures described in paragraphs (2) and (3).

  • Does response to intervention appear in the law?

Reschly SLD Identification


Implementing 3 Tier models

  • Tier 1: Enhanced Classroom instruction

  • Tier 2: Typically small group pull out instruction, but can represent additional dose in the classroom

  • Many approaches may work

  • Progress monitoring essential in order to gauge level of intensity and adjust instructional emphasis


Basic Instructional Principles (Tiers I, II, and III)

  • Instruction at the child’s skill level

  • Explicit, systematic, teacher directed, skills based

  • Strong curriculum: scope and sequence defined; skill hierarchy

  • Monitor progress, graph results in relation to goals

  • Formative evaluation rules and instructional changes

Reschly SLD Identification


Reading Instruction Must be Integrated KG- G12

  • If a critical component is missing, students who at risk will not develop the component

  • Success and failure in reading are opposite sides of the same coin- it’s the same theory, not two theories, one for success and another for failure

  • Instruction is the key


Problem Solving Process

Problem Analysis

Validating Problem

Ident Variables that Contribute to Problem

Develop Plan

Evaluate

Response to Intervention (RtI)

Implement Plan

Implement As Intended

Progress Monitor

Modify as Necessary

Define the Problem

Defining Problem/Directly Measuring Behavior


Why Problem-Solving ?BIG IDEAS

  • AYP and Disaggregated Data (NCLB) move focus of attention to student progress, not student labels

  • Building principals and superintendents want to know if students are achieving benchmarks, regardless of the students “type”

  • Accurate “placements” do not guarantee that students will be exposed to interventions that maximize their rate of progress

  • Effective interventions result from good problem-solving, rather than good “testing”

  • Progress monitoring is done best with “authentic” assessment that is sensitive to small changes in student academic and social behavior


Application of Tier II Principles

  • Focus on academics and behavior (e.g., point system for engagement, attention, task persistence, and gains)

  • Monitor progress 1 or 2 Xs per week

  • Graph progress against goals (benchmarks toward passing high stakes tests)

  • Use normative and other data to determine expected rate of progress

Reschly SLD Identification


Tier II Academic Interventions (Vaughn et al., 2003 Exceptional Children)

  • Goals: Move performance to benchmark trajectories and, If needed, consider more intensive interventions

  • Example of Tier II academic intervention

    • Small group, N=4-5, pull out, similar needs

    • 30 to 35 minutes per day in addition to classroom instruction

    • Progress monitoring weekly or semi-weekly

    • Individual time series analysis graph

    • 10 to 20 weeks of instruction

    • 5-component reading interventions, with emphasis on weak components

Reschly SLD Identification


Standard Protocol Reading Models for Tier II

  • http://www.texasreading.org/utcrla/U Texas,Vaughn

  • http://www.fcrr.org/Florida State Torgesen

  • Reading five domains taught each day

  • Direct instruction

  • Weekly progress monitoring

  • Individual graphs, progress against goals referenced to benchmarks

  • Decisions determined by student response

    • Fade Tier II and return to general education

    • Consider Tier III based on insufficient response


Direct, Explicit, Systematic, Teacher-Directed

  • Varies with student prior learning

  • Explicit instruction (Vaughn & Linan-Thompson)

    • provide clear instructions and modeling

    • include multiple examples (& non-examples when appropriate)

  • Systematic instruction (Vaughn & Linan-Thompson)

    • break tasks into sequential, manageable steps

    • progress from simple to more complex concepts and skills

    • ensure students have prerequisite knowledge & skills

Reschly SLD Identification


Direct, Explicit, SystematicTeacher-Directed Instruction, cont.

  • Teach all elements of the task

  • Break task into components—as far as needed

  • How explicit? Explicit enough for the student to make good progress

  • Teacher Models Skill, using multiple examples and non-examples

  • Teacher and student perform task together

  • Student performs task with feedback

  • Student independently practices task to automaticity

  • Integrate skills with prior skills and competencies

Reschly SLD Identification


Direct, Explicit, SystematicTeacher-Directed Instruction, cont.

  • Ample practice opportunities (Vaughn & LinanThompson)

    • provide multiple opportunities for students to respond and demonstrate their learning

    • provide sufficient guided and independent practice

  • Immediate, specific feedback (Vaughn & Linan-Thompson)

    • provide positive reinforcement and elaboration

    • correct errors and provide clarification to prevent students from practicing misconceptions

Reschly SLD Identification


Effective Features of Instruction

  • Targeted and explicit step-by-step lessons

  • Conspicuous strategies

  • Scaffolded support model

  • Active student engagement and participation

  • Ample, multiple practice opportunities


Effective Features of Instruction

  • Frequent, immediate feedback with additional opportunities to respond – specific error corrections

  • Continual and judicious review

  • Focus on skills struggling readers lack; teach less more thoroughly

  • Integrated assessment

  • Strategic integration of the five essential components of reading


What’s Happening in the Brain?


Child 1

Normal Reader

Child 2

w/ Reading Difficulties

Right Hemisphere

Left Hemisphere


The Big Ideas of Intervention

  • Supplement — students receive intervention in addition to core reading instruction

  • Intensify — achieved through more time on task, smaller group size, or both

  • Differentiate — accomplished through choice of materials, entry points, deliberate instruction, and reteaching

  • Accelerate - progress to make up losses


What Are Interventions?

  • Targeted assistance based on progress monitoring

  • Administered by teacher or specialist

  • Provided additional instruction (individual or small group)

  • Match materials to instructional level

  • Modify modes of task presentation

  • Modify instructional time

  • Increase task structure

  • Increase task relevant practice

J. McCook

LRP Conference

December 2005


What Are Interventions?

  • Mini-lesson on skills deficits

  • Decrease group size

  • Increase amount and type of cues and prompts

  • Teach additional strategies

  • Change curriculum

  • Change types and method of corrective feedback

J. McCook

LRP Conference

December 2005


What Interventions are Not…

  • Preferential seating

  • Shortened assignments

  • Parent contacts

  • Classroom observations

  • Suspension

  • Doing more of the same assignments

  • Retentions

J. McCook

LRP Conference

December 2005


Effective Features of Instruction

  • Small Groups

  • Coherent and consistent instructional routine

  • Targeted and explicit step-by-step lessons

  • Intense and deliberate direct instruction

  • Teacher Modeling

  • Active Student engagement and participation

  • Ample, multiple practice opportunities

  • Frequent, immediate feedback with additional opportunities to respond- specific error corrections

  • Continual and sufficient review

  • Focus on skills struggling readers lack


Response to Intervention at the St. Croix River Education District(SCRED)


Background

  • St. Croix River Education District has six member districts.

  • Total population is approximately 14,000 students.

  • Special Education child count is 1100

  • SCRED was the first district to pilot Curriculum Based Measures (CBM) in 1979 when they were being field-tested.

  • Long history of over 30 years of data-based decision making.


St. Croix River Education District (SCRED) members:

East Central

Hinckley-Finlayson

Pine City

Rush City

Chisago Lakes


SCRED RtI Model: Academics & Positive Behavior Support

Tier 3: Intensive 5-10%

Assessment

Tier 2: Strategic 15-20%

Instruction

Tier 1: Universal

75-80%

Problem-Solving & Organization


A few tips from Jim Ysseldyke

  • We need to move from sifting and sorting to multi-tiered serving.

  • We need to shift our focus from struggling students to making sure all students struggle.

  • The best place to start correcting learning problems is in the instructional process.

  • Keep our focus on assessment practices that matter!

  • Focus on Alterable Variables


If the water in the aquarium is dirty, don’t spend time diagnosing individual fish.

  • Students don’t learn in a vacuum.

  • They function in environments that include curriculum, specific instructional strategies, peers, and school organizations.

Credit to Amelia VonName Larsen for this quote.


The Water…

O

I

L

C

E


Water Domains


The question needs to change!

  • Shift the question we are asking from:

    “What about the student is causing the performance discrepancy?”

    to

    “What about the instruction, curriculum, & environment should be altered so that students will learn and be more successful?”


Guiding Questions for RtI Implementation

  • Is the core program sufficient?

  • If the core program is not sufficient, why isn’t it?

  • How will the needs identified in the core be addressed?

  • How will the effectiveness and efficiency of the core be monitored over time?

  • Have improvement to the core been effective?

  • For which students is the core program sufficient and not sufficient and why?

  • What specific supplemental and intensive instruction is needed?

  • How will supplemental and intensive instruction be delivered?

  • How will effectiveness of supplemental and intensive instruction be monitored?

  • Which students need to move to a different level of instruction?

    Sharon Kurns, Heartland AEA #11


Establishing a Measurement System

  • Core feature of RTI is identifying a measurement system

    • Screen large numbers of students

    • Identify students in need of additional intervention

    • Monitor students of concern more frequently

      • Monthly

      • Weekly


Characteristics of An Effective Measurement System

____________________________________

valid

reliable

simple

quick

inexpensive

easily understood

can be given often

sensitive to growth over short periods of time


Screening Measures used at SCRED

The Aimsweb program is used to manage data


Correlations with High-Stakes Tests

  • Letter sound fluency (Fall of K) to Oral Reading Fluency (Spring Gr.1) is .64**

  • Oral Reading Fluency to MCA-II ranges from .50** (grade 8) to .79**

  • Math Applications to MCA-II ranges from .51** to .79**

  • MAP Reading to MCA-II ranges from .72** - .78**

  • MAP Math to MCA-II ranges from .73**- .86**


Development of Target Scores

  • Logistical regression procedures used to predict performance on MCA-II

  • Tier 1 and Tier 2 Targets Developed


Progress Monitoring Measures used at SCRED

  • All GOMs are used through Grade 12 for students who are below target.


Lesson Learned Regarding Measurement

  • Measurement System Needs to:

    • Benchmark progress for ALL students three times per year.

    • Progress monitor at-risk students frequently.

    • Inform instruction!

    • Ideally be the same system across all three tiers of instruction

  • Training on how to collect data is not enough.

  • User friendly data reports are essential!

  • Use data both at the individual student level and at the system level to judge progress!


SCRED RtI Model: Academics & Positive Behavior Support

Tier 3: Intensive 5-10%

Assessment

Tier 2: Strategic 15-20%

Instruction

Tier 1: Universal

75-80%

Problem-Solving & Organization


Instruction

  • In an RTI model, it is imperative to have a high-quality, research-based curriculum in place that meets the needs of most students (~80%)

  • You don’t want to have large numbers of students referred for problem solving (or special education) due to an inadequate curriculum!

  • Emphasis on a 3-Tier Model


If All You Have is a Hammer,

Everything Starts to Look Like a Nail


If All a Teacher Has for Support for Students with Academic and/or Behavioral Needs

is Special Ed

Every Student with Academic and/or Behavioral Needs Will Look Like a.......


Bridging the Gap

Core + Intensive

Core + Supplemental

Weekly

Core

Amount of Resources Needed To Benefit

Weekly-Monthly

3x/year

Severity of Educational Need or Problem


Successful Multi-Tier Models Have:

  • A continuum of services and/or programs across the tiers that are scientifically based

  • Methods of evaluating and monitoring progress across the tiers, ideally those that are considered scientifically based

  • Efficient, COMMON methods of communicating student performance for all disciplines.


Tier 1 is Delivery of a Scientifically Based Core Program with...

  • Fidelity

  • Intensity

  • Passion

  • Reasonable Accommodations

    If Done Well, We Expect to Meet the Needs of Most...Some Will Need More


Tier 2 is “MORE”

  • (More) Time

  • (More) Explicit Teacher-Led Instruction

  • (More) Scaffolded Instruction

  • (More) Opportunities to Respond with Corrective Feedback

  • (More) Language Support, Especially Vocabulary

  • (More) Intensive Motivational Strategies

  • (More) Frequent Progress Monitoring


Tier 3 is “MOST”

  • (Most) Time

  • (Most) Explicit Teacher-Led Instruction

  • (Most) Scaffolded Instruction

  • (Most) Opportunities to Respond with Corrective Feedback

  • (Most) Language Support, Especially Vocabulary

  • (Most) Intensive Motivational Strategies

  • (Most) Frequent Progress Monitoring


Select Set of Standard Interventions Matched to Student Need

  • Reading

    • Reading Mastery

    • Corrective Reading

    • Journey’s (Voyager)

    • Read Naturally

    • Headsprout

    • Fluency Protocols

  • Math

    • Vmath (Voyager)

    • Odyssey

    • Study Island

    • Tools for Success

  • Behavior

    • Check and Connect

    • Social Skill groups

SCRED Examples


Lesson Learned: A Multi-Tiered Service Delivery Model is Critical

  • Efficient use of resources

  • Teaming

  • Instructional Time can be Problematic


Problem Solving Process and School-Wide Organization

  • Once a measurement system and research-based curriculum are in place, schools must have a problem solving system to meet the needs of unique learners.

  • Problem Solving Teams must have a process to use to develop interventions for at-risk students.

  • Buildings must be organized to support problem solving


Five building-level supporting structures promote Problem Solving and optimal student achievement:

Organization: Supporting Structures

____________________________________

  • Continuous Measurement

  • Grade-level Team Meetings

  • Flexible Grouping

  • Grade-level Scheduling

  • Concentrated Resources


Grade:

Target:

Goal:

Fall

Winter

Spring

Benchmark

Benchmark

Benchmark

Strategic

Strategic

Strategic

Intensive

Intensive

Intensive

Total ____

Enrollment:


Target: 43 72 90

2nd grade

Goal 70%

Spring

Fall

Winter

Benchmark

45 students

05-06 66%

04-05 61%

03-04 56%

Benchmark

47 students

05-06 70%

04-05 69%

03-04 61%

Benchmark

05-06

04-05 68%

03-04 54%

42

Isis 30-86

Johanna 35-85

A.S. Marie 31-76

Peggy D 33-73

Peggy N 43-71

Tom T 65-70

Strategic <43, >=26

6 students

9%

Strategic

10 students

15%

Strategic

2

Bobby 21-67

Woody 16-63

Edward 15-58

Truman 24-57

James 10-53

Intensive <26

17 students

25%

Intensive

10 students

15%

Intensive

10

Total 68 67

Enrollment:


Sample Summary of Effectiveness Chart

Developed by Dr. Barb Scierka, SCRED


Summary of Effectiveness Data


Schools Use CBM in Universal Screening Instead of Referral Driven Practices

< 25th

Tier 2 Candidates

<10th

Individual Problem Solving and/or

Tier 3 Candidates


Steps of Problem-Solving

2. Problem

Analysis

Why is the problem occurring?

1. Problem

Identification

What is the discrepancy between

what is expected and what is occurring?

3. Plan

Development

What is the goal?

What is the intervention plan to address this goal?

How will progress be monitored?

5. Plan

Evaluation

Is the intervention plan effective?

4. Plan

Implementation

How will implementation integrity be ensured?


Problem Identification

  • Identified problems are specifically defined in observable measurable terms

  • Technically adequate measurement systems are used to describe the behavior that is occurring and the behavior that is expected

  • Team prioritizes and considers one problem at a time


Problem Analysis

  • Efforts are made to assess why the problem is occurring

  • Teams focus on those possible causes to the behavior that can be affected through school resources

    • Curriculum, Instruction, Environment


Plan Development

  • Observable measurable goals are written for each problem to be addressed

    • Often end of year grade level goals

  • Interventions are research supported

  • Progress monitoring data is collected and graphed for every goal


Plan Implementation

  • Intervention plans are explicitly documented

  • Intervention integrity is assured through direct observation

    • Intervention is delivered as planned

  • Document level to which student participated in intervention

    • Attendance, time, active engagement


Plan Evaluation

  • Student progress is evaluated based on data

  • Records maintained on cases completed

    • Success rate, grade level or problem type most often referred

  • Ongoing team Functioning is considered

    • Efficiency of team meetings, quality of communication


Effectiveness of RtI at the St. Croix River Education District


Eligibility


History

  • MN has had criteria requiring severe IQ/ACH discrepancy, information processing deficits, and severe low achievement.

  • SCRED abandoned MN criteria after IDEA 2004 was passed saying that states can’t mandate the use of a SD model.

  • Workgroup was established in 2002 to develop our eligibility criteria.


“Millionaire Questions Addressed by Workgroup

  • What are the steps of our eligibility model?

  • Are we going to us the problem solving model, standard treatment protocol, or both?

  • How is “generally effective” instruction by the classroom teacher defined?

  • How we will define dually discrepant (level and slope)? What are the decision-making cut points?

  • What is the reference group for demarcating responsiveness? National, state, or local norms?

  • How long should students remain in an intervention phase?

  • What is the criteria for exiting students from special education?

  • When should due process be initiated?

  • What data should be collected to determine the effect of using a different criteria?

    SCRED SLD Guideline is available for download at www.scred.k12.mn.us


SCRED Criteria

  • Level of achievement is significantly discrepant from local expectations:

    • 7th percentile guideline initially established

    • 5th percentile after state rules developed

  • Rate of progress (slope) is significantly discrepant from target expectations.

    • Slope is below a 95% confidence interval around the target slope

  • Verification that the problem solving process was followed with integrity.

  • Verification that the student demonstrates educational needs that require special education services to be appropriately met.

  • Information Processing (state criteria)


MN 3525.1341 Specific Learning Disability

  • Districts can choose between severe discrepancy model or RtI approach.

  • RtI Approach:

    • Rate of Progress (slope)

      • Minimum of 12 data points (MN Rule 3525.1341 (2) (D).

    • Level of Achievement

      • 5th percentile (MN Rule 3525.1341(2)(D)(4))

      • Valid and reliable achievement measures

      • Compared to state or national norms

      • Local comparison may also be used


MN Rules 3525.1341 Specific Learning Disability

In addition:

- Underachievement

- Information Processing

- Exclusionary Factors


Case Study: Billy 8th grade

Problem Identification

Record Review

Interview teacher, parent, and student

Observation

Testing

Discrepancy Statement: Billy is reading 52 words correct per minute with 2 errors on eighth grade level reading passages. The target for 8th grade students in the spring is 170 WCPM.


Case Study

Problem Analysis

Data from a variety of sources (RIOT) and domains (ICEL) were collected to consider multiple hypotheses for the cause of the discrepancy.


Case Study

Converging data support the chosen hypothesis:

Billy is reading 52 words correct per minute with 2 errors on eighth grade level reading passages while same grade peers are expected to read 170 WCPM becauseBilly needs more practice to increase his reading fluency.


Case Study

Plan Development

  • Goal: By May 2005, Billy will read 113 words correct per minute with 0 errors from Grade 8 R-CBM passages. The rate of improvement should be 1.2 words correct per week.

  • Instructional Plan: Billy will participate in the Six Minute Solution reading intervention being implemented by Mr. Teacher in addition to his current reading program.


Case Study

2. Materials Needed: Aimsweb Grade 7 Reading passages, timer, colored pencils, graph

3. Measurement System: R-CBM collected weekly by a resource room paraprofessional on Tuesdays.

- Grade 8 reading passages for progress monitoring.


Case Study

Plan Implementation

  • The school psychologist observed Mr. Teacher implement the Six Minute Solution. A script was used for training the teacher, and this same script was used during the observation.

  • The observation indicated that the intervention was implemented correctly.

  • Data were collected and graphed as stated in the plan.


Case Study

Plan Evaluation

  • The intervention was implemented with fidelity.

  • Pre-intervention discrepancy stayed the same.

  • Team went through problem-solving steps again.


Case Study

1. Problem Identification

Discrepancy Statement: Billy is reading 58 words correct per minute with 2 errors on eighth grade level reading passages. The target for Grade 8 is 170 WCPM with an expected growth rate of 1.2 words per week.


2. Problem Analysis

RIOT/ICEL

Hypothesis: Billy is reading 58 words correct per minute with 2 errors on eighth grade level reading passages while same grade peers are expected to read is 170 WCPM becauseBilly needs more instructional time to increase his reading fluency.


Case Study

3. Plan Development

Small group reading using Corrective Reading, Level B Curriculum with reading teacher daily for 50 minutes in addition to core reading class.


Case Study: Entitlement Decision

Student’s slope is -.4 words per week

  • Bottom of confidence interval for Grade 8 is .28.

    Student’s level is 52.

  • 5th percentile score is 112 based on district local norms.


Case Study

  • Case Review Protocol indicates problem solving process was used with fidelity.

  • Team verified information processing concerns.

  • Team addressed exclusionary factors

  • Team Verified high degree of instructional need that must be addressed through SE services.

  • Team concludes student is eligible for special education services.


Lesson Learned: Intervention Integrity is a Hot Issue that Should Not be Ignored!

  • Critical to evaluate whether intervention was implemented as designed.

  • Supportive vs.. Evaluative

  • Who conducts integrity checks?


Lesson Learned: Documentation of Process is Critical

  • Must have a clearly defined process

  • Forms and guidelines to guide process

  • Start out with “tight reigns”

    • SCRED oversight of referrals

    • Problems with documentation


Lesson Learned: Ongoing Training and Support is Critical!

  • Problem Solving Team Training

  • RtI User’s Forum

  • Expert “troubleshooter”

  • Grade Level Teams

    • Use of data to make decisions

    • Interventions


Lesson Learned: Teach Patience and Flexibility

  • RtI implementation is a work in progress

    • Modify and adjust as necessary

    • Work together to implement the process and address questions

    • Answer questions from field but obtain input (RtI user forum, FAQ)

    • Emphasize that you might be working in the grey zone at times, but the process works for kids!


Lesson Learned: Expect Questions and Occasional Conflict

  • Top Questions:

    • What is the role of the special education teacher in the RtI process?

    • Who verifies the integrity of interventions?

    • How do we determine when an intervention is rigorous enough?

    • What are scientific, research-based interventions

  • Developed a FAQ sheet.


Additional Resources

  • Burns, M. & Gibbons, K. (2008) Implementing Response to Intervention in Primary and Secondary Schools: Procedures to Assure Scientific-Based Practices. Routledge: NY. (Amazon.com)


Problem Solving Training

  • RtI Summer Institute

  • June 21-23 2010 in Bloomington,MN

  • www.kimgibbons.org to download flyer


Questions?

Kim Gibbons

  • kgibbons@scred.k12.mn.us

  • 320-358-1214

    SCRED Website (for forms, etc.)

    www.scred.k12.mn.us


ad
  • Login