DownloadDetermining Eligibility for Special Education in an RTI System






Advertisement
Download Presentation
Comments
craig
From:
|  
(671) |   (0) |   (0)
Views: 89 | Added: 18-03-2012
Rate Presentation: 0 0
Description:
Acknowledgements. This presentation is based on a training module developed in collaboration with the Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network (PaTTAN) as part of the RTI Pilot Project. Amy Smith, Ed Shapiro, and other PaTTAN consultants contributed to the development of these materials. .
Determining Eligibility for Special Education in an RTI Sys...

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

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only and may not be sold or licensed nor shared on other sites. SlideServe reserves the right to change this policy at anytime. 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 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -




1. Determining Eligibility for Special Education in an RTI System Joseph F. Kovaleski, D.Ed., NCSP Indiana University of PA Indiana, PA 15705 724/357-3785 jkov@iup.edu www.coe.iup.edu/kovaleski

2. Acknowledgements This presentation is based on a training module developed in collaboration with the Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network (PaTTAN) as part of the RTI Pilot Project. Amy Smith, Ed Shapiro, and other PaTTAN consultants contributed to the development of these materials.

3. Today?s Perspective Assume knowledge of RTI and the three-tier model. Determining eligibility for special education using RTI presupposes that the RTI infrastructure has been built. This session is about using RTI as an alternative to ability-achievement discrepancy, not in addition to it. The perspective will be based on law/regulations and best practices.

4. Most relevant for those ready to use RTI. Some aspects of today?s presentation are relevant to the SLD requirements, even if you?re not using RTI. Application of some procedures and principles can begin now as effective practices.

5. Eligibility for Special Education Does the child have a disability? Autism Deaf-blindness Deafness Emotional disturbance Hearing impairment Mental retardation Multiple disabilities Orthopedic impairment Other health impairment Specific learning disability Speech or Language impairment Visual Impairment Does the child need specially designed instruction? adapting, as appropriate to the needs of an eligible child under this part, the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction? (i) To address the unique needs of the child that result from the child?s disability; and (ii) To ensure access of the child to the general curriculum, so that the child can meet the educational standards within the jurisdiction of the public agency that apply to all children.

6. Specific Learning Disability IDEA 2004 SLD Identification options Must not require the use of a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement for determining whether a child has a specific learning disability Must permit the use of a process based on the child?s response to scientific, research-based interventions May permit the use of other alternative research-based procedures

7. Problems with the Discrepancy Approach Need to wait until discrepant to deliver SDI Doesn?t link with intervention False positives (high IQ; average achievement) False negatives (the slow learner myth) JoeJoe

8. Determining SLD The group may determine the child has an SLD if the child: Does not achieve adequately for the child?s age or to meet State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the following areas, when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the child?s age or State-approved grade-level standards:

9. Determining SLD The group may determine the child has an SLD if the child: Does not make sufficient progress to meet age or State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the area when using a process based on the child?s response to scientific, research-based intervention OR The child exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, relative to age, State-approved grade level standards, or intellectual development, that is determined by the group to be relevant to the identification of a specific learning disability, using appropriate assessments

10. Determining SLD The group may determine the child has an SLD if: 3. The group determines the results are not primarily the result of - (i) A visual, hearing, or motor disability; (ii) Mental retardation; (iii) Emotional disturbance; (iv) Cultural factors; (v) Environmental or economic disadvantage (vi) Limited English proficiency

11. Determining SLD To ensure that underachievement is not due to lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math the group must consider: Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as a part of, the referral process, the child was provided appropriate instruction in regular education settings delivered by qualified personnel Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, which was provided to the child?s parents

12. Determining SLD Observations ? the public agency or group must: Ensure that a child is observed in their learning environment to document their academic performance and behavior in areas of difficulty Decide to use information from an observation in routine classroom instruction and monitoring of the child?s performance that was done before the child was referred for an evaluation Or Have at least one member observe academic performance in regular classroom after consent has been given Observe younger than school-age children in an environment appropriate for a child of that age

13. Determining SLD The public agency must promptly request parental consent to evaluate: If prior to referral, a child has not made adequate progress after an appropriate period of time when provided instruction and Whenever a child is referred for an evaluation

14. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis.

15. Four Questions for Eligibility Adequate achievement: Does the child achieve adequately for the child?s age or meet State-approved grade level standards? Eligibility Model: Does the child demonstrate a pattern of strengths and weakness OR has the child shown a lack of response to scientifically based instruction? Have other factors or conditions been ruled out? Are the student?s academic concerns the result of a lack of instruction? Each of the boxes from the graphic representation just shown, can be considered as questions. We?ll take each of the boxes ( criteria) separately to discuss the four questions for eligibility in the next part of the presentation.Each of the boxes from the graphic representation just shown, can be considered as questions. We?ll take each of the boxes ( criteria) separately to discuss the four questions for eligibility in the next part of the presentation.

16. Assessing Achievement Level Does the child achieve adequately for the child?s age or meet State-approved grade level standards?

17. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis.

18. IDEA Language (1) The child does not achieve adequately for the child?s age or to meet State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the following areas, when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the child?s age or State-approved grade-level standards: (i) Oral expression. (ii) Listening comprehension. (iii) Written expression. (iv) Basic reading skill. (v) Reading fluency skills. (vi) Reading comprehension. (vii) Mathematics calculation. (viii) Mathematics problem solving

19. Sources of Data to Document Lack of Achievement Existing Data Performance on benchmark assessments Terminal performance on progress monitoring measures Performance on statewide and district-wide assessments New Data to Collect (if necessary) Norm-referenced tests of academic achievement Curriculum-based evaluation (cf. Howell et al.) The evaluation team must determine whether the RTI data from early intervening activities are sufficient to make the initial eligibility determination for this criteria, ow whether additional assessments are needed. The evaluation team must determine whether the RTI data from early intervening activities are sufficient to make the initial eligibility determination for this criteria, ow whether additional assessments are needed.

20. Lack of achievement is in relation to age or grade-level standards. The student?s assessed achievement on all measures should be significantly behind age- or grade-peers. Measures should be reflective of state standards. Achievement here is related to age or grade, not intellectual level. The tests ( measures ) should be related to the state standards. For example: WRAT: Is not related to state standards, this would not be an assessment measure that meets this definition. One meaningful benchmark could be the PSSA ? such as being in the below basic or basic categories. No one benchmark or measure is sufficient under this criterion; the student should evidence inadequacy on multiple measures to qualify as a student with LD. Local performance standards are the standard against which the student should be judged for this criterion. State or national standards are the appropriate benchmarks. The tests ( measures ) should be related to the state standards. For example: WRAT: Is not related to state standards, this would not be an assessment measure that meets this definition. One meaningful benchmark could be the PSSA ? such as being in the below basic or basic categories. No one benchmark or measure is sufficient under this criterion; the student should evidence inadequacy on multiple measures to qualify as a student with LD. Local performance standards are the standard against which the student should be judged for this criterion. State or national standards are the appropriate benchmarks.

21. Normative Comparisons Normative group is important decision National normative data sets for CBM AIMSweb Hasbrouck & Tindal DIBELS This is a critical decision. There are so many available national data sets, especially for Reading, that local norms are really not needed. A district can select to use any of these normative sets, as long as there is a reasonable recognition that there will be some local variation against the national data sets. One problem that can occur in using local data sets and normative samples are the issues of low and high performing districts. Using such local norms can create lots of disparities across districts in decision making (but that is what we already do). It is recommended that one use and understand the national data set as the overall framework for expectation and then build in local expectations for high performing districts.This is a critical decision. There are so many available national data sets, especially for Reading, that local norms are really not needed. A district can select to use any of these normative sets, as long as there is a reasonable recognition that there will be some local variation against the national data sets. One problem that can occur in using local data sets and normative samples are the issues of low and high performing districts. Using such local norms can create lots of disparities across districts in decision making (but that is what we already do). It is recommended that one use and understand the national data set as the overall framework for expectation and then build in local expectations for high performing districts.

22. Who sets the parameters for being ?deficient? How deficient must a student be in order to demonstrate inadequate performance/achievement? It is the responsibility of individual school districts to establish or define appropriate assessment parameters. Contemporary research has indicated that a score of the 30th percentile on nationally normed benchmark tests or individual tests of academic achievement is equivalent to a proficient score on most statewide tests. Therefore, to demonstrate inadequate achievement relative to this standard, a student should be significantly below this level ( e.g.10 percentile) to meet the SLD qualification under this component. Contemporary research has indicated that a score of the 30th percentile on nationally normed benchmark tests or individual tests of academic achievement is equivalent to a proficient score on most statewide tests. Therefore, to demonstrate inadequate achievement relative to this standard, a student should be significantly below this level ( e.g.10 percentile) to meet the SLD qualification under this component.

23. How deficient should a student be to qualify? An opinion? Contemporary research has indicated that a score of the 30th percentile on nationally normed benchmark tests or individual tests of academic achievement is equivalent to a proficient score on most statewide tests. Therefore, to demonstrate inadequate achievement relative to this standard, a student should be significantly below this level ( e.g., 10th percentile) to meet the SLD qualification under this component.

24. 2.0X calculation Divide norm group mean by student?s score Result expressed as a ratio of deficiency Example: 100 wpm / 50 wpm = 2.0X Dick This is from ShinnDick This is from Shinn

25. DIBELS benchmarks (with ROI in parentheses based on 18 weeks between benchmarks, 36 total weeks): Example from DIBELS. Example from DIBELS.

26. Consider John, a third grader. We?ll compare his scores (denominators) with the scores of the norm group (numerators), using the 3rd grade norms for ORF and the 1st grade norms for NWF. ORF: 110 wpm = 2.0X 55 wpm NWF: 50 nwpm = 2.5X 20 nwpm

27. John is 2.0X (two times) deficient in ORF compared to other third graders: ORF: 110 wpm = 2.0X 55 wpm John is 2.5X (two and a half times) deficient in NWF compared to first graders: NWF: 50 nwpm = 2.5X 20 nwpm

28. May we use norm-referenced tests of academic achievement in determining the extent of the deficiency? May we? Yes! There is nothing legally that prevents a team from doing so. Should we? It depends on how secure you are with other data regarding the student?s deficiency in relation to standards. If you have a preponderance of other data, you may choose not to use other norm-referenced measures. If you don?t, or if there are other questions that can be answered with norm-referenced measures, use them.

29. Failure to meet age or grade level standards The student?s IQ level is not considered the criterion against which the student?s academic performance is compared. This is a new piece added to qualifying a student for SLD. This is a new piece added to qualifying a student for SLD.

30. 2 Implications to consider Students with intelligence levels in the ?slow learner? range may not be excluded from having SLD if they display significantly inadequate academic achievement and if they meet the other criteria (e.g., RTI) Conversely, students with high levels of intelligence must display inadequacies in relation to their age or the state standards for their grade in order to meet this criterion.

31. Does the child demonstrate a pattern of strengths and weaknesses or a lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction?

32. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis.

33. Criteria for Determining SLD ?300.309(a)(2) 33 (i) The child does not make?sufficient progress to meet age or State-approved?grade-level standards in one?or more of the areas identified ... when?using a process based on the child?s?response to scientific, research-based?intervention; or? (ii) The child exhibits a pattern of?strengths and weaknesses in?performance, achievement, or both,?relative to age, State-approved gradelevel?standards, or intellectual?development, that is determined by the?group to be relevant to the identification?of a specific learning disability, using?appropriate assessments, consistent?with ?? 300.304 and 300.305 PA CHAPTER 14: ?14.125(a)(2) PA CHAPTER 711: ?711.25(a)(2) FORMS: The Evaluate and Reevaluation Reports have been changed to reflect new requirements. TALKING POINTS: A district or IU is able to use either the (1) Response to Intervention (RtI) model or the (2) Discrepancy model to determine the existence of an SLD.PA CHAPTER 14: ?14.125(a)(2) PA CHAPTER 711: ?711.25(a)(2) FORMS: The Evaluate and Reevaluation Reports have been changed to reflect new requirements. TALKING POINTS: A district or IU is able to use either the (1) Response to Intervention (RtI) model or the (2) Discrepancy model to determine the existence of an SLD.

34. The RTI Option: Does the child demonstrate a lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction?

35. Multi-tier Model Essential component 1 is implementing a multi-tier model. In the literature, these are usually 3- or 4-tier models. The trend seems to be using a 3-tier models. In the illustration on this slide, the triangle illustrates ALL students in a school. The lowest (and biggest) area of the triangle depicts students who will become proficient in a curricular area based on general education (also called universal interventions or core instruction) instruction alone. The middle area depicts students who will need both core instruction PLUS something supplemental in order to become proficient. (This tier is sometimes called supplemental or strategic instruction) The small area at the top reflects the small number of students who will need core instruction PLUS something supplemental in order to become proficient. This tier is often called intensive instruction. The percentages next to the sections of the triangle are not cut in stone. However, these numbers are approximately the parameters that educators should be striving for in order to allow our systems to be as effective as possible. One advantage of using this model as a standard is that it allows schools to evaluate the effectiveness of their core instruction. That is, they can see how many of their students who receive general education alone are becoming proficient. In cases where too few general education students are becoming proficient based on core instruction alone, a school can work on ?robusting up? its core program instead of referring all of these ?less than proficient students? for supplemental or intensive programming. This is a great improvement to our historical system where it was difficult to distinguish the difference between students with disabilities from students who were ?instructional casualties.? One misinterpretation to guard against when thinking about this model is that tier 1 is general education, tier 2 is Title 1 and tier 3 is special education. This is a common misunderstanding and could lead to simply keeping the historical system and calling it RtI. General education, Title 1 and special education are resources for providing Universal interventions, supplemental interventions and intensive interventions. There are students, for example, who will need intensive instruction who will not qualify for special education (e.g., some English-language learners, some talented and gifted students, students who have missed out on significant instruction due to illness etc.). The focus of this model is primarily on the NATURE and INTENSITY of instruction that students need. Which funding source can be used to provide these resources is a secondary consideration. Essential component 1 is implementing a multi-tier model. In the literature, these are usually 3- or 4-tier models. The trend seems to be using a 3-tier models. In the illustration on this slide, the triangle illustrates ALL students in a school. The lowest (and biggest) area of the triangle depicts students who will become proficient in a curricular area based on general education (also called universal interventions or core instruction) instruction alone. The middle area depicts students who will need both core instruction PLUS something supplemental in order to become proficient. (This tier is sometimes called supplemental or strategic instruction) The small area at the top reflects the small number of students who will need core instruction PLUS something supplemental in order to become proficient. This tier is often called intensive instruction. The percentages next to the sections of the triangle are not cut in stone. However, these numbers are approximately the parameters that educators should be striving for in order to allow our systems to be as effective as possible. One advantage of using this model as a standard is that it allows schools to evaluate the effectiveness of their core instruction. That is, they can see how many of their students who receive general education alone are becoming proficient. In cases where too few general education students are becoming proficient based on core instruction alone, a school can work on ?robusting up? its core program instead of referring all of these ?less than proficient students? for supplemental or intensive programming. This is a great improvement to our historical system where it was difficult to distinguish the difference between students with disabilities from students who were ?instructional casualties.? One misinterpretation to guard against when thinking about this model is that tier 1 is general education, tier 2 is Title 1 and tier 3 is special education. This is a common misunderstanding and could lead to simply keeping the historical system and calling it RtI. General education, Title 1 and special education are resources for providing Universal interventions, supplemental interventions and intensive interventions. There are students, for example, who will need intensive instruction who will not qualify for special education (e.g., some English-language learners, some talented and gifted students, students who have missed out on significant instruction due to illness etc.). The focus of this model is primarily on the NATURE and INTENSITY of instruction that students need. Which funding source can be used to provide these resources is a secondary consideration.

36. Response to Intervention Standards aligned core instruction Universal screening Interventions of increasing intensity Research-based practices Progress monitoring Data analysis teaming Parental engagement If choosing RTI as the criterion for identifying students with SLD, then the RTI process must have the essential elements as listed in this slide. These practices of core instruction, standard protocol interventions, and so forth must be delivered with fidelity and sufficiency. Teachers must be adequately trained in the programs or practices. The standard protocols must be delivered as intended. Instructional practices must be aligned to the PA state standards. Integrity checklists are an excellent tool to use to assess the fidelity of instructional practices related to standard protocol and the core curriculum. Progress monitoring becomes essential for the determination of the student?s rate of improvement ? slope.If choosing RTI as the criterion for identifying students with SLD, then the RTI process must have the essential elements as listed in this slide. These practices of core instruction, standard protocol interventions, and so forth must be delivered with fidelity and sufficiency. Teachers must be adequately trained in the programs or practices. The standard protocols must be delivered as intended. Instructional practices must be aligned to the PA state standards. Integrity checklists are an excellent tool to use to assess the fidelity of instructional practices related to standard protocol and the core curriculum. Progress monitoring becomes essential for the determination of the student?s rate of improvement ? slope.

37. Documentation of instructional sufficiency and fidelity For the purposes of the determination of eligibility, evaluation teams must document that foundational core instruction as well as strategic and intensive interventions were sufficient and were provided at a high degree of fidelity for a sufficient length of time.

38. Factors to consider for Tier 1 Was the core program aligned to the state standards? Was the curriculum in place for a sufficient amount of time? Were the teachers trained in how to use the curriculum? Were the teachers using effective instruction methodologies? Were data analysis teams used to support the delivery of core instruction?

39. Factors to consider for Tier 2 and 3 Were the interventions used supported by scientific research? Were standard treatment protocols followed for the interventions with students? [fidelity checks] Were the teachers/staff implementing the interventions trained in delivering the intervention with fidelity? Were the interventions delivered for a sufficient amount of time? Was a team used to help design and support the interventions? Documentation of the delivery of these interventions, including duration and frequency of the interventions, and rigorous adherence to the critical features of the interventions should be documented in the evaluation report.Documentation of the delivery of these interventions, including duration and frequency of the interventions, and rigorous adherence to the critical features of the interventions should be documented in the evaluation report.

40. Determination of Rate of Improvement Progress monitoring is a rigorous assessment technique that is based in research on applications of repeated measurement techniques featuring brief and frequent measurements.

41. Progress Monitoring ? Choosing Tools Efficient Reliable Sensitive to growth Sensitive to instruction

42. Progress Monitoring Resources National Center for Progress Monitoring: Provides technical assistance about progress monitoring practices (Gr K- 5) www.studentprogress.org National Center for RTI http://www.rti4success.org/chart/progressMonitoring/progressmonitoringtoolschart.htm

44. Monitoring Slope of Progress Important part of the PM process is the evaluation of student performance over time Behavior over time is reflected in rate of change or slope Slope calculation needs to be for both the expected and actual levels of student performance

45. DIBELS benchmarks (ROI based on 18 weeks between benchmarks, 36 total weeks): Example from DIBELS. Example from DIBELS.

46. Calculating Rate of Improvement (Slope) Slope = Y2 ? Y1 X2 ? X1 Score on last probe administered (Y2) Score on first probe administered (Y1) Last administrative time period (X2) First administration time period (X1)

47. Slope Example Slope = Y2 ? Y1 X2 ? X1 Score on last probe administered (Y2 = 90) Score on first probe administered (Y1 = 44) Last administrative time period (X2 = 36) First administration time period (X1 = 1) Example ? 2nd grade ORF: 90 ? 44 = 46 = 1.31 wcpm/wk. 36 ? 1 35 This second grader?s ROI (slope) is 1.31 words correct per minute per week.

48. Third Grade Student - Joe Enters Tier 2 strategic instruction in reading after winter benchmark Current reading level ? baseline 70 wcpm End of Year DIBELS benchmark = 110 wcpm Start of progress monitoring = week 18 End of progress monitoring = week 28 Calculate his slope using the following data:

49. Joe?s Performance Words Correct Per Minute Week 18 = 70 (baseline) Week 20 = 73 Week 22 = 74 Week 24 = 79 Week 26 = 85 Week 28 = 91 What is his slope of performance? What decision would you make against expected outcome?

50. Joe

51. Third Grade Student - Elliot Enters Tier 2 strategic instruction in reading after fall benchmark Current reading level ? baseline 56 wcpm End of Year DIBELS benchmark = 110 wcpm Start of progress monitoring = week 2 End of progress monitoring = week 12 Calculate his slope using the following data:

52. Elliot?s Performance Words Correct Per Minute Week 2 = 56 (baseline) Week 4 = 54 Week 6 = 57 Week 8 = 58 Week 10 = 55 Week 12 = 59 What is his slope of performance? What decision would you make against expected outcome?

53. Elliot

54. How deficient is the student?s ROI? The 2.0X calculation Divide norm group mean ROI by student?s ROI Result expressed as a ratio of deficiency Example: 1.0 wpm/wk = 2.0X 0.5 wpm/wk Dick This is from ShinnDick This is from Shinn

55. 2.0X calculation Divide norm group mean ROI by student?s ROI Result expressed as a ratio of deficiency Example: 1.0 wpm/wk = 2.0X 0.5 wpm/wk Examples Joe Elliot .9 wpm/wk = .44X .9 wpm/wk = 3.0X 2.1 wpm/wk .3 wpm/wk Dick This is from ShinnDick This is from Shinn

56. ROI (Slope) Calculation Aids Vanderbilt University?s IRIS Center http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/rti02_assessment/cresource.htm Flinn, McCrea & Ferchalk www.rateofimprovement.com

57. How low is low? How slow is slow? There is not a research consensus on this issue at this time. Note that there never was a research consensus on the extent of the ability-achievement discrepancy. However, there is a good deal of research underway addressing this question (e.g., Christ, Ardoin, et al.).

58. In the meantime? The decision on how deficient a student needs to be to qualify rests with the MDE. A rough guide: A student with a learning disability should be severely deficient in level and display a poor response to research-based interventions (slope) such that he or she is not likely to meet benchmarks in a reasonable amount of time without intensive specially designed instruction.

59. Decision to Evaluate Rate of progress is below target and typical rate History of failure in curriculum In targeted instructional support for at least 9 months with multiple data-driven changes using research-proven techniques and programs PM shows significantly below peers Below Basic or Basic on state tests

60. Rule out other factors or conditions Have other factors or conditions been ruled out?

61. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis.

62. Rule Out: Vision

63. Rule Out: Hearing

64. Rule Out: Motor Ruling out Orthopedic disability. Ruling out Orthopedic disability.

65. Example of Report Language: Documentation of Rule-out of Other Disabilities and Conditions Sensory Impairments: John's vision has been screened on an annual basis by the school. No visual problems have been detected. Vision problems are ruled out as a possible reason for John's academic difficulties.

66. Rule Out: Mental Retardation

67. Rule Out: Emotional Disturbance

68. Rule Out: Cultural Factors

69. Rule Out: Environmental or Economic Disadvantage Situations such as homelessness, child abuse, poor nutrition, and other factors may adversely impact a student?s ability to learn. In addition, chronic medical conditions, frequent absences, sleep disorders should be duly considered. Whether these factors are impacting on the student?s academic skills should be documented int e evaluation report, and may serve to rule out SLD.Situations such as homelessness, child abuse, poor nutrition, and other factors may adversely impact a student?s ability to learn. In addition, chronic medical conditions, frequent absences, sleep disorders should be duly considered. Whether these factors are impacting on the student?s academic skills should be documented int e evaluation report, and may serve to rule out SLD.

70. Rule Out: Limited English Proficiency Federal law requires all students be screened to determine if their primary home language is other than English. If so, the student?s proficiency in the English language must be assessed by school personnel.Federal law requires all students be screened to determine if their primary home language is other than English. If so, the student?s proficiency in the English language must be assessed by school personnel.

71. RULE OUT LACK OF INSTRUCTION Has the student been provided with appropriate instruction?

72. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis. First two boxes are inclusionary. The 3rd and 4th boxes are exclusionary. Lack of progress ? box 2: basically a reference to progress monitoring. Rule Out: can be ruled out by full evaluation, but it is sufficient to rule it out through screening. Must be documented in report. All four boxes are required. - You must pick one of the options in box 2. Repeated assessments: routine screening. Should be shared with parents on regular basis.

73. Special rule for eligibility determination A child must not be determined to be a child with a disability under this part? (1) If the determinant factor for that determination is? (i) Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including the essential components of reading instruction (as defined in section 1208(3) of the ESEA); (ii) Lack of appropriate instruction in math, or (iii) Limited English proficiency; (?300.306[b])

74. NCLB ?1208(3) (3) ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF READING INSTRUCTION.? The term ?essential components of reading instruction? means explicit and systematic instruction in? (A) phonemic awareness; (B) phonics; (C) vocabulary development; (D) reading fluency, including oral reading skills; and (E) reading comprehension strategies.

75. IDEA Language ?300.309(b): To ensure that underachievement?in a child suspected of having a specific?learning disability is not due to lack of?appropriate instruction in reading or?math, the group must consider, as part?of the evaluation described in??? 300.304 through 300.306?? (1) Data that demonstrate that prior to,?or as a part of, the referral process, the?child was provided appropriate?instruction in regular education settings,?delivered by qualified personnel; and? (2) Data-based documentation of?repeated assessments of achievement at?reasonable intervals, reflecting formal?assessment of student progress during?instruction, which was provided to the?child?s parents.?

76. Question: Was the student effectively taught? Is a Standards-Based Curriculum in Place? Is it based on scientific research? If a scientifically validated curriculum is in place, is there evidence that it is being delivered at a sufficient level of fidelity? Discuss core curriculum being in place. 75-80% of students proficient. Discuss core curriculum being in place. 75-80% of students proficient.

77. Has the student been provided with individualized supports in the general education classroom? Has the student been provided with a sufficiently intense individualized intervention using research-based instructional procedures? Standard protocol being researched based. Give examples.Standard protocol being researched based. Give examples.

78. Ruling Out Lack of Instruction Has the student been provided with appropriate instruction?

79. Key Questions to Address Is a Standards-Based Curriculum in Place (Tier 1)? Is it based on scientific research? If a scientifically validated curriculum is in place, is there evidence that it is being delivered at a sufficient level of fidelity?

80. Was the student effectively taught? Has the student been provided with individualized supports in the general education classroom (Tier 1)? Has the student been provided with a sufficiently intense individualized intervention using research-based instructional procedures (Tier 2)?

81. Is a Standards-Based Curriculum in Place (Tier 1)? Alignment in the Areas of: Content Instructional Strategies Student Performance Levels Training Notes: Curricula should promote a common understanding of the standards. It must provide guidance to teachers about content, instructional strategies, and desirable levels of student performance.Training Notes: Curricula should promote a common understanding of the standards. It must provide guidance to teachers about content, instructional strategies, and desirable levels of student performance.

82. Core Reading Program General Principles Serves as the base of reading instruction Provides complete instruction in the key components of reading Designed for all settings and all students Is preventive and proactive Incorporates a high probability of student proficiency (80%) Training Notes: Examples of Core Reading Programs: Trophies (Harcourt), Houghton Mifflin Reading (Houghton Mifflin), Open Court Reading (SRA/McGraw Hill) Core reading programs are designed as the base of instruction and oriented toward whole group instructional procedures given that the focus is on large scale change to classroom instructional procedures. These procedures assist teachers in bringing large percentages of students to acceptable levels of reading proficiency. Therefore, scientifically-based core reading programs are recommended as the primary vehicle for systematically teaching all of the essential reading components documented by the National Reading Panel Report and, therefore, actualizing the core curriculum. Preventive/Proactive: The National Research Council stated that the best intervention is effective instruction. Converging research indicates that effective initial classroom instruction using the core reading program is proactive so that reading difficulties can be prevented. In contrast, reading instruction has been approached historically from a remedial perspective. Preventive instruction is a paradigm shift for our educational system. Educators can look at preventive instruction much like an onion. Just as onions have layers, there are layers of preventive instruction that respond to student needs, the next layer more intense and supportive than the last. No matter which layer is considered, each aims at preventing reading difficulties. The first layer utilizes the comprehensive core reading program in whole group, followed by differentiated instruction in small group rotations with extended instruction from the core and supplementary reading curriculum. (90-Minutes Plus presentation by Ruth Gumm and Sheryl Turner, Eastern Regional Reading First Technical Assistance Center) Core reading programs are designed to meet the needs of 80% of the student population. Training Notes: Examples of Core Reading Programs: Trophies (Harcourt), Houghton Mifflin Reading (Houghton Mifflin), Open Court Reading (SRA/McGraw Hill) Core reading programs are designed as the base of instruction and oriented toward whole group instructional procedures given that the focus is on large scale change to classroom instructional procedures. These procedures assist teachers in bringing large percentages of students to acceptable levels of reading proficiency. Therefore, scientifically-based core reading programs are recommended as the primary vehicle for systematically teaching all of the essential reading components documented by the National Reading Panel Report and, therefore, actualizing the core curriculum. Preventive/Proactive: The National Research Council stated that the best intervention is effective instruction. Converging research indicates that effective initial classroom instruction using the core reading program is proactive so that reading difficulties can be prevented. In contrast, reading instruction has been approached historically from a remedial perspective. Preventive instruction is a paradigm shift for our educational system. Educators can look at preventive instruction much like an onion. Just as onions have layers, there are layers of preventive instruction that respond to student needs, the next layer more intense and supportive than the last. No matter which layer is considered, each aims at preventing reading difficulties. The first layer utilizes the comprehensive core reading program in whole group, followed by differentiated instruction in small group rotations with extended instruction from the core and supplementary reading curriculum. (90-Minutes Plus presentation by Ruth Gumm and Sheryl Turner, Eastern Regional Reading First Technical Assistance Center) Core reading programs are designed to meet the needs of 80% of the student population.

83. Core Reading Program Program Design Coordinated instructional sequences and routines Explicit instructional strategies Ample practice opportunities Training Notes: The design of core reading programs should include these features of program design. Coordinated instructional sequences Programs need to planfully sequence individual skills and build skills sequentially, overtly linking skills to one another rather than having them embedded or implied Progressing from easier to more difficult concepts Example of a coordinated instructional sequence with three different instructional activities (phonological awareness, connecting sound-spelling, and practice/application) with the letter/sound m Students practice oral blending focusing on the /m/ sound Students learn to connect the sound with the letter m Students read words which include the /m/ sound Another example of a coordinated instructional sequence Students learn to connect /a/ with the vowel diagraph ai Students read word lists that include words that have /a/ (spelled ai) and other previously learned letter combination sounds and syllable patterns Students read decodable passages (using repeated readings) Students spell words that include /a/ spelled ai and other letter and letter combination sounds previously learned Explicit instructional strategies Materials must provide a clear method for teaching the instructional objective. Strategies need to be direct, straightforward, and clear The following teaching routine should be evident in research based programs for all components of reading: Teacher models and explains Teacher provides guided practice (students practice what the teacher modeled and the teacher provides prompts and feedback) Teacher provides supported application (students apply the skill as the teacher scaffolds instruction) Independent practice Ample practice opportunities Materials must provide students many opportunities to actively engage in the skill Programs need to provide sufficient examples for teachers to model the skill and enough additional examples for students to practice the skill Ample practice opportunities are provided when students are asked to apply what they have been taught in order to accomplish specific reading tasks Practice should follow in a logical relationship with what has just been taught in the program Once skills are internalized, students are provided with opportunities to independently apply previously learned informationTraining Notes: The design of core reading programs should include these features of program design. Coordinated instructional sequences Programs need to planfully sequence individual skills and build skills sequentially, overtly linking skills to one another rather than having them embedded or implied Progressing from easier to more difficult concepts Example of a coordinated instructional sequence with three different instructional activities (phonological awareness, connecting sound-spelling, and practice/application) with the letter/sound m Students practice oral blending focusing on the /m/ sound Students learn to connect the sound with the letter m Students read words which include the /m/ sound Another example of a coordinated instructional sequence Students learn to connect /a/ with the vowel diagraph ai Students read word lists that include words that have /a/ (spelled ai) and other previously learned letter combination sounds and syllable patterns Students read decodable passages (using repeated readings) Students spell words that include /a/ spelled ai and other letter and letter combination sounds previously learned Explicit instructional strategies Materials must provide a clear method for teaching the instructional objective. Strategies need to be direct, straightforward, and clear The following teaching routine should be evident in research based programs for all components of reading: Teacher models and explains Teacher provides guided practice (students practice what the teacher modeled and the teacher provides prompts and feedback) Teacher provides supported application (students apply the skill as the teacher scaffolds instruction) Independent practice Ample practice opportunities Materials must provide students many opportunities to actively engage in the skill Programs need to provide sufficient examples for teachers to model the skill and enough additional examples for students to practice the skill Ample practice opportunities are provided when students are asked to apply what they have been taught in order to accomplish specific reading tasks Practice should follow in a logical relationship with what has just been taught in the program Once skills are internalized, students are provided with opportunities to independently apply previously learned information

84. Core Reading Program Program Design Aligned student materials and assessments Small and large group instructional activities Scaffolding to support initial learning and transference of skills Cumulative review Training Notes: Aligned students materials The content of student materials (texts, activities, homework, manipulatives, etc.) work coherently with classroom instruction to reinforce the acquisition of specific skills in reading Student aligned materials include a rich selection of coordinated students materials at various readability levels to help build skills through practice One way a program aligns student materials with instruction is by providing materials for the students to read that reflect that instruction Example: The text selections that students read should be closely aligned with the phonics instruction they receive If students are taught specific letter-sound relationships, they should have the opportunity to practice applying that knowledge to decoding words in text If students are taught specific vocabulary words, they should have the opportunity to read materials containing those words, or engage in writing activities that apply those words in sentences or paragraphs Aligned assessments Small/large group In class grouping strategies are provided Scaffolding Cumulative review Programs must have a regular and cumulative review of all essential skills to ensure maintenance of the skill by students Training Notes: Aligned students materials The content of student materials (texts, activities, homework, manipulatives, etc.) work coherently with classroom instruction to reinforce the acquisition of specific skills in reading Student aligned materials include a rich selection of coordinated students materials at various readability levels to help build skills through practice One way a program aligns student materials with instruction is by providing materials for the students to read that reflect that instruction Example: The text selections that students read should be closely aligned with the phonics instruction they receive If students are taught specific letter-sound relationships, they should have the opportunity to practice applying that knowledge to decoding words in text If students are taught specific vocabulary words, they should have the opportunity to read materials containing those words, or engage in writing activities that apply those words in sentences or paragraphs Aligned assessments Small/large group In class grouping strategies are provided Scaffolding Cumulative review Programs must have a regular and cumulative review of all essential skills to ensure maintenance of the skill by students

85. Q. What do we do in those situations in which core programs are recommended, but the review of the literature does not identify a solid research base? A. Supplemental reading programs provide additional instruction in one or more areas of reading to support the core. One size does not fit all?may need to supplement or modify (Oregon Reading First, 2004) Core Core plus supplemental Core plus intervention Intervention Intervention plus supplemental

86. Effective Core Reading Curriculum Key elements of scientifically-based core programs includes explicit and systematic instruction in the following: Phonological Awareness Phonics Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension Training Notes: Handout: 5 Big Ideas in Reading The content of scientifically-based core reading programs include these big ideas of reading. The presenter should provide a brief definition of the each of the five key elements listed on the slide so that all participants are working from the same frame of reference. Phonological Awareness is the ability to hear and manipulate sounds in words. Critical skills in phonological awareness include: Sound isolation (?The first sound in sun is /sss/. What is the first sound in sun??) Blending (?I am going to say the sounds in a word, and you say it fast. /sss/ /uuu/ /nnn/ say it fast.?) Segmenting (?The sounds in sun are /sss/ /uuu/ /nnn/.?) Substituting: (?The word is fan. What word? What word to we have when we change the /f/ to /c/??) Deleting: (?The word is play. What word? What word to we have when we take away /l/??) Adding: (?The word is rap. What word? What word do we have when we add /t/ to the front of rap??) Phonics is the ability to associate sounds with letters and use these sounds to read words. It includes Alphabetic awareness?knowledge of letters of the alphabet coupled with the understanding that the alphabet represents the sounds of spoken language and the correspondence of spoken sounds to written language Alphabetic understanding?understanding that the left-to-right spellings of printed words represent their phonemes from first to last. Phonological recoding?translation of letters to sounds to words to gain lexical access to the word (meaning) Fluency is the ability to read a text quickly (speed), accurately (accuracy), and with prosody (proper expression) (National Reading Panel, 2000) Critical skills in fluency include: Producing letter-sound correspondences (?Given a set of letters, the student can produce the associated sound within one second.?) Reading sight words automatically (?Given a set of irregular words in a set or in a passage, the student can identify the words in one second or less.?) Reading connected text fluently (specific rates per grade) Vocabulary development is the ability to understand (receptive) and use (expressive) words to acquire and convey meaning. Comprehension is the complex cognitive process involving the intentional interaction between reader and text to extract meaning Once the brief definitions have been reviewed, direct participants to the supplementary packet of information entitled ?Five Key Elements? that includes additional information, resources, and references. (Handout #10?The Five Key Elements of Reading) Training Notes: Handout: 5 Big Ideas in Reading The content of scientifically-based core reading programs include these big ideas of reading. The presenter should provide a brief definition of the each of the five key elements listed on the slide so that all participants are working from the same frame of reference. Phonological Awareness is the ability to hear and manipulate sounds in words. Critical skills in phonological awareness include: Sound isolation (?The first sound in sun is /sss/. What is the first sound in sun??) Blending (?I am going to say the sounds in a word, and you say it fast. /sss/ /uuu/ /nnn/ say it fast.?) Segmenting (?The sounds in sun are /sss/ /uuu/ /nnn/.?) Substituting: (?The word is fan. What word? What word to we have when we change the /f/ to /c/??) Deleting: (?The word is play. What word? What word to we have when we take away /l/??) Adding: (?The word is rap. What word? What word do we have when we add /t/ to the front of rap??) Phonics is the ability to associate sounds with letters and use these sounds to read words. It includes Alphabetic awareness?knowledge of letters of the alphabet coupled with the understanding that the alphabet represents the sounds of spoken language and the correspondence of spoken sounds to written language Alphabetic understanding?understanding that the left-to-right spellings of printed words represent their phonemes from first to last. Phonological recoding?translation of letters to sounds to words to gain lexical access to the word (meaning) Fluency is the ability to read a text quickly (speed), accurately (accuracy), and with prosody (proper expression) (National Reading Panel, 2000) Critical skills in fluency include: Producing letter-sound correspondences (?Given a set of letters, the student can produce the associated sound within one second.?) Reading sight words automatically (?Given a set of irregular words in a set or in a passage, the student can identify the words in one second or less.?) Reading connected text fluently (specific rates per grade) Vocabulary development is the ability to understand (receptive) and use (expressive) words to acquire and convey meaning. Comprehension is the complex cognitive process involving the intentional interaction between reader and text to extract meaning Once the brief definitions have been reviewed, direct participants to the supplementary packet of information entitled ?Five Key Elements? that includes additional information, resources, and references. (Handout #10?The Five Key Elements of Reading)

87. Effective Instructional Design Allocation of time Connection to supplemental materials Grouping strategies Implemented Flexible Active student engagement Effective classroom management High levels of academic learning time

88. If a scientifically validated curriculum is in place, is there evidence that it is being delivered at a sufficient level of fidelity?

89. Tier 1 Fidelity Check: Process How long has the curriculum been in place? Were teachers adequately trained? Are teachers using the prescribed materials? Is the curriculum being delivered for a sufficient amount of time? How long has the student been taught in this curriculum? Is the curriculum being delivered according to prescribed directions?

90. Considerations to assess the provision of appropriate instruction Principal?s observation of teacher performance through classroom visits and observations conducted during the instructional period for the targeted content/subject area on a regular basis. Checklists of integrity of instruction completed by teachers as self-check measures Checklists of integrity of instruction completed among teachers as peer-check measures Completion of checklists by content specialists or curriculum supervisors working with teachers. If it is determined that there has not been a sufficient provision of standards-aligned curriculum and instruction as well as supplemental interventions of sufficient intensity, these programmatic features should be put in place for the student to determine whether they will result in improved academic performance. It should b e noted that these requirements pertain to all districts for all students being considered for SLD designation regardless of whether shcools are using RTI as one of the eligibility criteria.If it is determined that there has not been a sufficient provision of standards-aligned curriculum and instruction as well as supplemental interventions of sufficient intensity, these programmatic features should be put in place for the student to determine whether they will result in improved academic performance. It should b e noted that these requirements pertain to all districts for all students being considered for SLD designation regardless of whether shcools are using RTI as one of the eligibility criteria.

91. Fidelity Checklists http://www.coe.iup.edu/kovaleski/rti.htm

92. Fidelity Check Options Use of a prepared checklist of critical features of the instructional program: Teacher self-monitoring Peer coaching Lesson plan review by principal Observation by principal Many programs leave permanent products that reflect fidelity.

93. Tier 1 Fidelity Check: Outcomes Has the general education curriculum succeeded in bringing a high percentage of students to proficiency? The sufficiency of the general education curriculum should be judged by its outcomes in terms of overall student performance.

94. Why does Keshawn have a discrepancy? Training Notes: Based on a one-time assessment, Keshawn is significantly discrepant from the expected level of functioning. However, what is the context for Keshawn?s performance?Training Notes: Based on a one-time assessment, Keshawn is significantly discrepant from the expected level of functioning. However, what is the context for Keshawn?s performance?

95. Training Notes: Note that Keshawn, the referred student, is performing at the same level as his peers. Training Notes: Note that Keshawn, the referred student, is performing at the same level as his peers.

96. Training Notes: Training Notes:

97. Next Question: Has the student been provided with individualized supports in the general education classroom? Has a plan been developed that targets the student?s deficiency through supplemental intervention in the general education classroom (differentiated instruction)? Is the supplemental program based on research?

98. Has the student been provided with a sufficiently intense individualized intervention using research-based instructional procedures (Tier 2)? Has a plan been developed that targets the student?s deficiency through supplemental intervention in the general education classroom (differentiated instruction)? Is the supplemental program based on research? Have the interventions used featured a research-based ?standard protocol??

99. A Standard Protocol Intervention ? is scientifically based. has a high probability of producing change for large numbers of students. is usually delivered in small groups. is designed to be used in a standard manner across students. is often scripted or very structured.

100. Standard Protocol Websites http://www.fcrr.org/

101. Tier 2 Process Analysis (cont.) Has the intervention been implemented with a high degree of fidelity? Has progress monitoring occurred at least weekly during the course of the intervention? Has a building-level team (e.g., IST) helped to design and guide the implementation of the intervention?

102. Tier 2 Analysis: Outcomes Is there evidence that the individualized intervention provided to the student has facilitated meaningful progress for other students receiving the same supports?

103. Trainers? Notes: The tier 2/3 intervention is working well for students #18 and #19, so it can be judged to be an efficacious intervention. It is not working for student #20.Trainers? Notes: The tier 2/3 intervention is working well for students #18 and #19, so it can be judged to be an efficacious intervention. It is not working for student #20.

104. Repeated Assessments Repeated assessments of achievement or behavior, or both, conducted at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal monitoring of student progress during the interventions. Information regarding the student?s progress should be periodically provided to the student?s parents.

105. Frequency of Repeated Assessments Repeated assessment information may come from: Universal Screening Typically conducted 3 times a year Strategic intervention Typically progress monitored once a month Intense intervention ( tier 2) Typically progress monitored once a week

106. Observations

107. IDEA 2004 The public agency must ensure that the child is observed in the child?s learning environment, including the regular classroom setting to document the child?s academic performance and behavior in the areas of difficulty. Use information from the child?s performance that was done before the referral for an evaluation Or At least one member of the evaluation team conduct an observation in the general education classroom after the child has been referred for an evaluation and parental consent.

108. Why observe? Should assist in the documentation that appropriate instruction was provided, also to inform the decisions about recommended instructional changes. Observations across instructional settings are especially valuable, as are observations by different team members.

109. What kind of observations? Behavioral observation procedures Methods that relate to student?s classroom behavior to instructional conditions and teaching practices Informal or anecdotal recordings that address referral questions, instructional practices, and instructional fidelity.

110. Observation-based Approaches Behavioral assessment techniques Basic techniques (event, time sampling, etc.) Combination techniques (e.g., scatterplot) Formal measures (e.g., BASC SOS) Contextualized behavioral assessment SECOS BOSS

111. SECOS States & Events Assess w/ Interval Recording or Time Sampling: Seat work (SW) Out of seat (OS) Looking around (LK) Social interaction with other child (SIC) Social interaction with teacher (SIT) Other Activity Assess w/ Event Recording: Raise hand (RH) Calling out (CAI) Approach child (AC) Other child approach (OCA)

112. SECOS: Teacher Assess with Event Recording: Teacher approach/student doing schoolwork (TA/SW) Teacher approach/student doing other activity (TA/OTH) Teacher approval (APP) Teacher disapproval (DIS)

114. Special considerations

115. Using RTI for SLD eligibility The use of RTI in the identification process for SLD is only appropriate when the school district is delivering high quality instruction and interventions with fidelity and is precisely assessing the student?s response to intervention.

116. May other instruments be administered? Tests of cognitive processing Tests of visual motor integration Tests of auditory processing Tests of receptive and expressive language Etc.

117. Can you use both models? According to an OSEP letter to the field, a district may use both the RTI model and the discrepancy model in particular situations. A district with a plan to phase in RTI over a three to five year period may use RTI in one building and the discrepancy model in another. Districts may also choose to use RTI for SLD determination at the elementary level and discrepancy model at the secondary level. These and other exceptions must be documented and approved through the special education plan approval process.

118. However? If a district chooses RTI as its procedure for a particular school, all students identified with SLD in that school must meet the RTI eligibility criteria, in addition to what may be indicated on other assessments. Conversely, if a district chooses the ability-achievement (A-A) discrepancy as its procedure for a particular school, all students identified with SLD in that school must meet the A-A eligibility criteria, in addition to what other assessments or the student?s RTI indicate.

119. Should other instruments be administered? Consider treatment validity. The selection of any assessment instrument or procedure is solely dependent on its ability to provide specific information about scientifically validated instructional strategies that have a high probability of producing meaningful change in the student?s academic or social-emotional skills.

120. For More Information: PA LD-RTI Guidelines: www.pattan.k12.pa.us. Click on RTI. Then publications.


Other Related Presentations

Copyright © 2014 SlideServe. All rights reserved | Powered By DigitalOfficePro