Responsiveness-to-Intervention: What is It?

1. Responsiveness-to-Intervention:What is It? George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education and Research University of Connecticut October 11,02008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org George.sugai@uconn.edu

2. www.pbis.org

3. PURPOSE Provide brief overview of features of Responsiveness-to-Intervention for EVERYONE in school

5. Outcomes

6. RtI Rationale

8. RtI Definition

9. RtI: Good “IDEiA” Policy Approach or framework for redesigning & establishing teaching & learning environments that are effective, efficient, relevant, & durable for all students, families & educators • NOT program, curriculum, strategy, intervention • NOT limited to special education • NOT new

10. Quotable Fixsen “Policy is allocation of limited resources for unlimited needs • Opportunity, not guarantee, for good action” “Training does not predict action” • “Manualized treatments have created overly rigid & rapid applications”

11. RtI Features

12. Response to Intervention RtI

13. RtI History & Logic

17. Intensive, Individual Interventions • Individual Students • Assessment-based • High Intensity • Intensive, Individual Interventions • Individual Students • Assessment-based • Intense, durable procedures • Targeted Group Interventions • Some students (at-risk) • High efficiency • Rapid response • Targeted Group Interventions • Some students (at-risk) • High efficiency • Rapid response • Universal Interventions • All students • Preventive, proactive • Universal Interventions • All settings, all students • Preventive, proactive Responsiveness to Intervention Academic Systems Behavioral Systems 1-5% 1-5% 5-10% 5-10% 80-90% 80-90% Circa 1996

18. “Triangle” ?’s • Why triangle? • Why not pyramid or octagon? • Why not 12 tiers? 2 tiers? • What’s it got to do w/ education? • Where’d those %’s come from?

19. Tertiary (FEW) Reduce complications, intensity, severity of current cases Secondary (SOME) Reduce current cases of problem behavior Primary (ALL) Reduce new cases of problem behavior Public Health & Disease PreventionKutash et al., 2006; Larson, 1994

21. Circa 1994

22. Tertiary Prevention: Specialized Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT FEW ~5% Secondary Prevention: Specialized Group Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior ~15% SOME Primary Prevention: School-/Classroom- Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings ALL ~80% of Students

23. Intensive, Individual Interventions • Individual Students • Assessment-based • High Intensity • Intensive, Individual Interventions • Individual Students • Assessment-based • Intense, durable procedures • Targeted Group Interventions • Some students (at-risk) • High efficiency • Rapid response • Targeted Group Interventions • Some students (at-risk) • High efficiency • Rapid response • Universal Interventions • All students • Preventive, proactive • Universal Interventions • All settings, all students • Preventive, proactive Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success Academic Systems Behavioral Systems 1-5% 1-5% 5-10% 5-10% 80-90% 80-90% Circa 1996

24. RtI Application Examples

25. RTI Continuum of Support for ALL Few Some All Dec 7, 2007

26. Questions to Ponder • What is “scientifically/evidence-based” intervention/practice? • How do we measure & ensure “fidelity of implementation?” • How do we determine “non-responsiveness?” • Can we affect “teacher practice?” • Do we have motivation to increase efficiency of “systems” organization? • ???

27. Possible RtI OutcomesGresham, 2005

28. Avoiding False +/-

29. Messages RtI logic is good thing for all students, families, & schools Still some work to refine technology, practices, & systems Implications & complexities for practice, systems, & implementation

30. George.sugai@uconn.edu Robh@uoregon.edu www.pbis.org