Response to Intervention RtI: 3 Tiered System

Response to Intervention RtI: 3 Tiered System PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 353 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Download Presentation

Response to Intervention RtI: 3 Tiered System

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


1. 1 Response to Intervention (RtI): 3 Tiered System A Model to Meet Student Needs in the Minneapolis Public Schools • Tom Hegranes, Exec. Director of Special Education Services • Ann Casey, Director of Special Education Programs • Doug Marston, Administrator of Research & Evaluation, Special Education Services Good afternoon - our pleasure to be with you today. Today we’d like to share our ideas about Response to Intervention. We will start with the development of the MPS Problem-Solving Model. Then we will switch to some of things happening on the national scene. And then we will return to the ongoing work in MPS and ideas we have for improvements to the model. We will take questions……Good afternoon - our pleasure to be with you today. Today we’d like to share our ideas about Response to Intervention. We will start with the development of the MPS Problem-Solving Model. Then we will switch to some of things happening on the national scene. And then we will return to the ongoing work in MPS and ideas we have for improvements to the model. We will take questions……

2. 2

3. 3 Data-Based Problem-Solving Model Deno and Mirkin (1977)

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6

7. 7

8. 8

9. 9

10. 10

11. 11

12. 12

13. 13

14. 14

15. 15

16. 16

17. 17

18. 18 Current National Scene: • IDEA 2004 • National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE), • Innovations Conference

19. 19 IDEA 2004 The law states: Notwithstanding section 607(b), when determining whether a child has a specific learning disability as defined in section 602, a local education 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 (20 U.S.C. 1414 (b) (6) (A)

20. 20 IDEA 2004 con’t In determining 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 paragraphs 2 and 3 (20 U.S.C. 1313 (b)(6) (B)

21. 21 Response to Intervention: Policy Considerations and Implementation Overview of the NASDSE document

22. 22 Where to get the document www.nasdse.org/documents/RtI%20Order%20Form.pdf Authored by George Batsche, Judy Elliott, Janet Graden, Jeffrey Grimes, Joseph Kovaleski, David Prasse, Dan Reschly, Judy Schrag, & Dave Tilly Cost is $15.00 for single copy

23. 23 Table of Contents 1. Definition of RtI 2. RtI Foundations in Research and Policy 3. Support for RtI in Federal Law 4. Core Principles of RtI 5. Essential Components of RtI 6. Special Education Eligibility Determination in RtI RtI Policy Considerations RtI Professional Development

24. 24 Origins of RtI Data based program modification (Deno & Mirkin, 1977) Formative evaluation rules (Fuchs, Deno, & Mirkin, 1984) Problem solving process (Bergan & Kratochwill, 1990) Problems with LD prevalence across states (Reschly & Hosp, 2004) National Reading Panel findings (2000) Concern of minority overrepresentation (Heller, Holtzman, & Messick, 1982) National Summit on LD (2002) concluded there should be alternative ways to identify individuals with SLD

25. 25 Core principles We can effectively teach each and every student Intervene early Use a multi-tier model of service delivery Use a problem-solving method to make decisions within a multi-tier model Use research-based validated interventions/instruction Monitor student progress to inform instruction Use data to make decisions Use assessment for 3 purposes: screening, diagnostics, progress monitoring

26. 26 Eligibility Determination Level difference Rate of learning difference Documented adverse impact Exclusion factors still apply

27. 27 Setting eligibility criteria Validity and reliability of procedures continues to be very important - however, treatment validity takes on added importance Multiple measures continue to be used and a multidisciplinary team makes the determination just as in the traditional model

28. 28 Historical RtI Ability achievement discrepancy National norms used Tests administered in 1 or 2 sittings Presumed hypothetical constructs assessed Little relationship between measures and interventions Significant difference in performance compared to peers, low rate of progress Regional, or local norms used more Data collected over time Very specific skills measured Direct relationship between measures and intervention

29. 29 Policy options SEA does not provide leadership - delegating decision to LEA SEA support at various levels Support multi-tier system within NCLB for general, remedial, & special ed Support RtI for eligibility for LD and possibly other high incidence disabilities Support RtI decision making within Special Ed.

30. 30 Innovations Conference Group of people who have been meeting annually over the years who are committed to an RtI Model Sept. 05 approximately 120 met in Lansing, MI to review the NASDE document and draw plans for next steps for their states In April, a small group of Innovation participants met and crafted draft blueprints for how to implement RtI at the: State level District level Building level Sept. 06- Innovations Conference in Long Beach, CA

31. 31

32. 32 Staff & students will benefit from a seamless system of instruction and support for the areas of academic achievement & social-emotional development. A 3 tiered model of support provides a framework for the development and acceleration of all students Following are some depictions of 3 tiered models

33. 33

34. Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success

35. 35

36. 36 Academics & Positive Behavior: 1 model This model has been successfully applied to both academic and behavior skills (but few districts have integrated both) Provides teachers w/clear guidelines and procedures for implementation regarding: Universal instruction in academic and social-emotional development for all students Targeted instruction and support in any of these areas for some students to meet or exceed established benchmarks Intensive instruction and support for the few students who need highly specialized instruction that can’t be sustained by general ed. teacher

37. 37 Current Initiatives that use an RtI framework Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (PBIS) Reading First

38. 38 RtI: Two Models Standard Protocol Problem-solving

39. 39 MPS: an example of the Problem Solving How data are used in PSM in Minneapolis Public Schools

40. 40

41. 41

42. 42

43. 43

44. 44 Problem Solving Model Outcomes

45. 45

46. 46

47. 47

48. 48

49. 49

50. 50

51. 51

  • Login