IDM

1. for Building Level Leaders September 2007 IDM/RTI 

7. In Northwest AEA, 74% of 11th graders with IEPs are not able to read proficiently…

8. In Northwest AEA, nearly one out of every two 8th graders of low socio-economic status cannot read proficiently.

9. "We can, whenever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us. We already know more than we need to do that."

10. It's time

14. Northwest Area Education Agency

20. Purposes… Increase awareness and understanding of the IDM/RTI model. Increase understanding of how this model will help all of us improve student achievement. What you can expect from Northwest AEA staff.

21. Questions…

23. Unresolved Problems… Undocumented benefit of remedial, compensatory, and special education programs for “high incidence” disabilities. Eligibility determination procedures that have a weak relationship to instructional interventions, and in some cases were unreliable, invalid, and unintentionally cause harm by delaying intervention. IEPs that do not implement scientifically based instruction/interventions. Traditional system uses an antiquated model that waits for a child to fail, instead of a model based on prevention and intervention.

24. Overrepresentation of some minority students in special education that have undocumented and sometimes dubious benefits. Failure of traditional assumptions about the underlying causes of learning problems, or matching instruction to presumed strengths in learning styles, information processing modalities, or cognitive processes. Little emphasis on prevention and early identification of problems when less complex and easier to resolve. Too often, qualifying for special education becomes an end point, not a gateway to more effective instruction and strong intervention. The deliberate separation of special education from general education.

25. Traditional Model

26. What do others say?

27. What do others say? Researchers concluded that the traditional basis for LD identification-intellectual ability, academic achievement discrepancy and cognitive or psychological processing - were not useful, because of limited or non-existent research foundations. Endorsed alternative ways to identify LD, “Response to quality intervention is the most promising…” “Problem solving models have been shown to be effective…” Researchers concluded that the traditional basis for LD identification-intellectual ability, academic achievement discrepancy and cognitive or psychological processing - were not useful, because of limited or non-existent research foundations. Endorsed alternative ways to identify LD, “Response to quality intervention is the most promising…” “Problem solving models have been shown to be effective…”

28. What do others say?

29. Promising trends in research and practice… Scientifically based curricula and instruction is rich and expanding. Multi-tiered models have a large and growing research base. Progress monitoring and formative evaluation (CBM-standard passages, DIBELS, AIMSweb, etc.) technologies to allow analysis and display of data. Development of methods for analysis and remediation of achievement problems (CBE, Direct Instruction). Use of Functional Behavior Assessment/Positive Behavior Support Support for Standard treatment protocol interventions

30. P.L. 94-142 1975 Access to Programs Emphasis on Child Find Discrepancy driven identification Separate Programs, Curriculum based on label Access to General Education Curriculum Emphasis on Results Instructional needs drive identification Emphasis on Services needed to be successful in the general education curriculum Support For IDM/RTI in the Law IDEA 2004

31. P.L. 94-142 1975 Assessment based on “testing” Low expectations Placement No accountability for results Assessment based on student’s response to instruction High expectations Services Accountability for results. Support For IDM/RTI in the Law IDEA 2004

32. Current Law IDEA 2004 “Must not be identified as disabled if there is not a clear instructional history in reading instruction that follows this guidance (NRP)“Must not be identified as disabled if there is not a clear instructional history in reading instruction that follows this guidance (NRP)

33. Current Law IDEA 2004

38. Problem Solving at all Three Tiers It is difficult to predict, with certainty, which instructional approaches will work with students until they are implemented - effectiveness must be determined as implementation occurs

40. So…What is IDM/RTI? “RTI is the practice of: (1) providing high-quality instruction/intervention matched to student needs and (2) using learning rate over time and level of performance to (3) make important educational decisions” Three tiered model Should each of these be discussed separately after this slide?Should each of these be discussed separately after this slide?

41. Should each of these be discussed separately after this slide?Should each of these be discussed separately after this slide?

42. Core Principles of IDM/RTI We can effectively teach all children Intervene early Use a multi-tiered model of service delivery Use a problem-solving method to make decisions within a multi-tiered model Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions/instruction to the extent available Monitor student progress to inform instruction Use progress data to make decisions about a student’s response to intervention Use assessment for 3 different purposes ..screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring

43. Important points:Important points:

46. Tier 1 Core Instruction Curriculum and instructional program that has a high probability of bringing a preponderance of students to acceptable levels of proficiency (80%) Screening (3X per year), inspect both group and individual performance Intervention is whole class instruction (Differentiated Instruction, added practice, grouping, “Extra Scoops”, consult with Curriculum/Instruction Specialists)  Analysis of data at Tier 1 serves two functions: (1) Evidence of effectiveness of core instruction and (2) identify students who may need more intensive intervention at Tier 2

51. Tier 2 Targeted Short Term Interventions Supplemental instruction provided to poor responders at Tier 1. In addition to Tier 1 instruction (Core +) Combination of: (1) Standard treatment protocols and (2) Problem-solving interventions

53. 2 students appear to be responding to the standard protocol, 3 are not and the team decides to focus on phonemic awareness as the culprit, specifically segmentation and blending. The intervention is changed to a customized format. 2 students appear to be responding to the standard protocol, 3 are not and the team decides to focus on phonemic awareness as the culprit, specifically segmentation and blending. The intervention is changed to a customized format.

54. Merger of the two approaches at Tier 2 is most desirable Standard Treatment protocols as a first step, especially those with a strong research base (i.e. early literacy) More customized problem solving for those who do not respond to standard treatment or for whom no standard treatment is available (i.e. behavior)

55. Tier 3 Intensive Instruction Longer term interventions, when student is not responsive to Tiers 1 and 2. May or may not include the provision of special education services (e.g. ELL, intensive practice of early literacy skills) May include Full and Individual Initial Evaluation for Special Education or may be added to an existing IEP. Unlike traditional evaluation, the data used to determine eligibility are the data gathered during Tiers 1 and 2.

57. 2 students appear to be responding to the standard protocol, 3 are not and the team decides to focus on phonemic awareness as the culprit, specifically segmentation and blending. The intervention is changed to a customized format. 2 students appear to be responding to the standard protocol, 3 are not and the team decides to focus on phonemic awareness as the culprit, specifically segmentation and blending. The intervention is changed to a customized format.

58. (tap all available expertise – Ed Services, Special Educators, Support Staff – collaborate, communicate, cooperate EARLY!) (tap all available expertise – Ed Services, Special Educators, Support Staff – collaborate, communicate, cooperate EARLY!)