RTI in Early Childhood

RTI in Early Childhood PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 122 Views
  • Updated On :
  • Presentation posted in: General

RTI. The systematic use of assessment data to most efficiently allocate resources in order to enhance learning for all students (Burns

Download Presentation

RTI in Early Childhood

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. RTI in Early Childhood Amanda VanDerHeyden Education Research & Consulting, Inc.

2. RTI The systematic use of assessment data to most efficiently allocate resources in order to enhance learning for all students (Burns & VanDerHeyden, 2006).

3. Essential Elements Screening Intervention intensity matched to child need Progress monitoring Outcomes of intervention efforts linked to service allocation decisions and program evaluation

4. Why RTI in EC/EI? Adults embrace the idea that early intervention is meant to repair and prevent future learning and behavior deficits and excesses Less learning history available Technical adequacy of measures is problematic (Neiworth & Bagnato, 1992)

5. Early Screening Identifies Children At Risk of Reading Difficulty Notes: This slide demonstrates the power of screening assessment to predict reading outcomes through the end of fourth grade. Reading outcomes were measured at the end of each year. The measure reported here assesses a combination of reading accuracy and comprehension.  The children were administered measures of phonemic awareness and letter knowledge at the beginning of first grade, and divided into two groups: At-Risk, and Low Risk. [click] The line in red shows the progress of children who began first grade performing in the bottom 15% in phonemic awareness and letter knowledge. At the end of fourth grade, these children were reading at an average level of mid second grade. In contrast, children who began first grade with higher levels of phonemic awareness and letter knowledge and roughly equivalent levels of overall ability, finished fourth grade reading at beginning fifth grade level.Notes: This slide demonstrates the power of screening assessment to predict reading outcomes through the end of fourth grade. Reading outcomes were measured at the end of each year. The measure reported here assesses a combination of reading accuracy and comprehension.  The children were administered measures of phonemic awareness and letter knowledge at the beginning of first grade, and divided into two groups: At-Risk, and Low Risk. [click] The line in red shows the progress of children who began first grade performing in the bottom 15% in phonemic awareness and letter knowledge. At the end of fourth grade, these children were reading at an average level of mid second grade. In contrast, children who began first grade with higher levels of phonemic awareness and letter knowledge and roughly equivalent levels of overall ability, finished fourth grade reading at beginning fifth grade level.

6. Early Intervention Changes Reading Outcomes Notes: Children from the bottom 15% in phonemic awareness and letter knowledge were randomly assigned to either a control group, or a group that received more intensive reading instruction in first and second grade. [click] The dotted red line shows the progress of the children who did not receive extra instructional intervention, and you can see that improved classroom instruction produced slightly better outcomes for them than in the earlier study in the same schools. [click] However, the children who were identified by the screening tests and received substantial instructional intervention did almost as well as average children by the end of fourth grade. Improved classroom instruction will help our most at-risk children learn to read better, but most will require more intensive interventions if we expect them to read at grade level by the end of fourth grade. Notes: Children from the bottom 15% in phonemic awareness and letter knowledge were randomly assigned to either a control group, or a group that received more intensive reading instruction in first and second grade. [click] The dotted red line shows the progress of the children who did not receive extra instructional intervention, and you can see that improved classroom instruction produced slightly better outcomes for them than in the earlier study in the same schools. [click] However, the children who were identified by the screening tests and received substantial instructional intervention did almost as well as average children by the end of fourth grade. Improved classroom instruction will help our most at-risk children learn to read better, but most will require more intensive interventions if we expect them to read at grade level by the end of fourth grade.

7. Hart & Risley Rate of vocab growth at age 3 correlated with PPVT (.58) and TOLD (.74) scores at age 9-10 Vocab use at age 3 (.57, .72) and r = .56 with comprehension scores from the CTBS. SES moderately correlated with vocab growth, use, and PPVT scores (r =.5-.6) H & R interpret as different parenting behaviors being associated with SES accounting for observed differences by SES Test of Language Dvlp Comprehensive test of basic skills No association between vocab growth and use with performance on academic skills tests other than comprehensionTest of Language Dvlp Comprehensive test of basic skills No association between vocab growth and use with performance on academic skills tests other than comprehension

8. Cumulative Language Experience by SES

9. Ratio of Encouragements to Discouragements per Hour

10. Ideas that have Failed us Children will “outgrow” early skill deficits Waiting/delaying intervention Retention “Transition” classes

14. Ideas that have Failed us Providing an enriched environment is sufficient to meet the needs of all “typically-developing” children

17. Measures of Cognitive Ability Not Useful at K and 1st Children who can detect/manipulate rhymes, phonemes, or syllables learn more quickly to read irrespective of IQ, vocab, memory, and SES (Wagner et al., 1994). Measures of cognitive ability were not useful for reaching screening decisions or allocating instructional resources (Vellutino, 1996)

18. Direct Msrs of Early Literacy were Useful Letter-sound association and use of sounds to read words– strong predictor of reading achvmt at end of first grade (Smith, Simmons, & Kame’enui, 1998). Direct msrs of early reading skills were useful (Vellutino, 1996)

19. Science of Prevention Entering phonological ability, SES, and attention/behavior– strongly predict reading growth (Torgesen et al., 1999). Torgesen et al. (2001)- 40% of children exposed to intensive intervention were exited from special education within one year of completion (60 8-10 year old children identified with LD) More than half of children provided with intervention at 1st grade performed in the average range following intervention (Vellutino, 1998).

20. Early Math Findings Children are not attaining minimal standards for competency in math by end of formal schooling. Children in poverty disproportionately represented (Griffin & Case, 1997; Starkey, Klein, & Wakeley, 2004). Early intervention repairs and prevents (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Karns, 2001; Griffin & Case, 1997; Phillips, Fuchs, Fuchs, & Hamlett, 1996).

21. Early Behavior Findings Summarize walker data from ABAI- get from website Summarize fox and center for challenging behaviors Summarize elliott too here

22. Consensus to Prevent most reading problems by reducing the # of children who enter school with poor emergent literacy skills (oral language, print knowledge, phonological processing skills)- NRP Prevent early mathematics deficits by screening, providing intervention in early numeracy Permit school success by proactive and early training in “ready to learn” behaviors

27. Let’s abandon the ideas that have failed us Emphasis on Maturation Let’s intervene early Emphasis on Enriched Environment Let’s ensure sufficient opportunities to gain important skills Emphasis on Teacher and Parent self-report and checklists Let’s obtain direct measures of child performance at regular intervals and in response to intervention trials

28. RTI Connects Efforts in EC/EI To bring evidence-based practices to early childhood To monitor progress and intervene early To connect what happens in EI to pre-K and pre-K to K and beyond To move beyond disability-driven service delivery

29. Benefits of RTI in EC/EI Models at EC/EI emphasize inclusion Potential for more children to receive support and high-quality intervention Decision accuracy will be enhanced

30. Old Way

31. New Way

32. Some Powerful Opportunities Allows us to measure the potential for learning and growth (VanDerHeyden, 2005) And as a result, to accelerate growth

34. CBA or Mastery Model

35. CBM or General Outcome

36. CBA versus CBM Target: Drinking from cup at snack time Hypothesis: grasping problem Intervention: alter handle to make grasping easier, provide practice using adapted cup, reinforce correct cup use Alternative hypotheses are plausible that can be tested directly Skill related-- child cannot bring cup to mouth fluently Performance related-- child is not thirsty, does not like the drink offered, finds spilled liquid aversive

37. Was intervention effective?

38. Did you solve the problem?

39. How about now?

41. We should Measure the behaviors we are targeting and measure whether those effects contribute to improved general outcomes Assessment has too narrowly focused on individual sub-skills generally in the form of a developmental checklist

42. Enhanced Decision Accuracy High base rates for risk (low-performing sample) (35 children in pre-K and headstart) Alliteration and rhyming probes outperformed Brigance Screens in predicting who would perform in the risk range on DIBELS subtests (ISF and LNF) Intervention improved the stability of the risk decision in two preschool classes (rank-order became more stable across intervention trials when rhyming performance was the predictor).

43. Classwide intervention produced stronger gains than did individual intervention. The bottom 50% was relatively stable throughout intervention, but only one child was identified as needing further intervention following classwide and individual intervention Intervention placed children on aimline for mid-year kinder success for 8 of 20 and 11 of 15 in second sample (headstart sample was lower performing to start but 26/32 considered at risk on Brigance)

44. Highlight Barnett et al 2006 Gettinger and stoiber 2007

45. Some Common Problems Integrity of intervention implementation Don Deshler- Attempt, Attack, Abandon

46. Some Unique Challenges What are the key outcomes? Insufficient progress monitoring tools More variable environments (teachers, PT, OT, ST, SP, some children at home, some in childcare only, some in preschool) Unclear what decision rules at what timepoints to inform movement between tiers of intervention Difficulty of measurement

47. What can I do Tomorrow Examine Tier 1-- see where you are in three key areas Install technically adequate screening and progress monitoring Follow data and engage in problem solving Year 2- install Tier 2 interventions

48. Resources www.naspweb.org- early childhood position statements Best Practices Big Math for Little Kids Number Worlds Headsprout Kansas Center www.rtinetwork.org

  • Login