1 / 25

What is ‘Response to Intervention’ (RTI)?

sera
Download Presentation

What is ‘Response to Intervention’ (RTI)?

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Getting Started With ‘Response to Intervention’: A Guide for SchoolsDrawn from:Tracey Hall, Center for Applied Special Technology E. Johnson, D. McKnight, D. Fuchs, & M. A. McKnightNational Research Center on Learning DisabilitiesJim Wright, www.interventioncentral.orgThis team’s work in TnT over the last 9 years

  2. What is ‘Response to Intervention’ (RTI)? • RTI is an assessment and intervention process for systematically monitoring student progress and making decisions about the need for instructional modifications or increasingly intensified services using progress monitoring data • Johnson et al., 2006 • Responsiveness to Intervention (RTI): How to Do It

  3. Context for RTI • RTI has been around for many years. It has gained prominence due to recent changes in special education law in the US. • The goal of RTI is to monitor student progress continuously and respond when a student is failing to make adequate progress. • Ideally, this process will result in fewer referrals to the special education system, as problems should be caught and resolved earlier.

  4. Components of RTI • Schoolwide screening • Is student at risk? • Is intervention needed? • Progress monitoring • Is student making adequate progress? • Is intervention working? • Tiered service delivery • Is a more intensive intervention required? • Fidelity of Implementation • Is the intervention being carried out appropriately?

  5. Core Classroom Instruction: 100% of students Tier I Intervention:  20% - 30% of students Tier II Tier III Intensive Intervention:  5% - 10% of students

  6. Assumptions in Using RTI • High quality instruction is taking place in the classroom. • Classroom teachers are doing their jobs, supported by appropriate professional development. • The instructional and management methods used are supported by the research literature. • Decisions are based on data • The goal is to identify problems as soon as they develop. • School is conducting universal screening and progress monitoring

  7. What are advantages of RTI? • One advantage of RTI in the diagnosis of educational disabilities is that it allows schools to intervene early to meet the needs of struggling learners. • Another advantage is that RTI maps those specific instructional strategies found to benefit a particular student. This information can be very helpful to both teachers and parents.

  8. The steps of RTI for an individual case… Under RTI, if a student is found to be performing well below peers, the school will do the following: • Estimate the academic skill gap between the student and typically-performing peers • Determine the likely reason(s) for the student’s depressed academic performance • Select a scientifically-based intervention likely to improve the student's academic functioning • Monitor academic progress frequently to evaluate the impact of the intervention • If the student fails to respond to several well-implemented interventions, refer for full psychoeducational evaluation.

  9. Estimate the academic skill gap between the target student and typically-performing peers: There are three general methods for estimating the ‘typical’ level of academic performance at a grade level: • Local Norms: A sample of students at a school is screened in an academic skill to create grade norms (Shinn, 1989) • Research Norms: Norms for ‘typical’ growth are derived from a research sample, published, and applied by schools to their own student populations (e.g., Shapiro, 1996) • Criterion-Referenced Benchmarks: A minimum level, or threshold, of competence is determined for a skill. The benchmark is usually defined as a level of proficiency needed for later school success (Fuchs, 2003)

  10. Median (2nd Quartile)=71 Group Norms: Converted to Box-Plot 1st Quartile=43 3rd Quartile=108 Billy=19 Hi Value=131 Low Value=31 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Correctly Read Words-Book 4-1 Baylor Elementary School : Grade Norms: Correctly Read Words Per Min : Sample Size: 23 Students Group Norms: Correctly Read Words Per Min: Book 4-1: Raw Data 31 34 34 39 41 43 52 55 59 61 68 71 74 75 85 89 102 108 112 115 118 118 131 LOCAL NORMS EXAMPLE: Twenty-three 4th-grade students were administered oral reading fluency Curriculum-Based Measurement passages at the 4th-grade level in their school. • In their current number form, these data are not easy to interpret. • So the school converts them into a visual display—a box-plot —to show the distribution of scores and to convert the scores to percentile form. • When Billy, a struggling reader, is screened in CBM reading fluency, he shows a SIGNIFICANT skill gap when compare to his grade peers.

  11. Research Norms: Example Norms for ‘typical’ growth are derived from a research sample, published, and applied by schools to their own student populations

  12. Determine the likely reason(s) for the student’s depressed academic performance: There can be several possible underlying reasons why a student is doing poorly in an academic area. It is crucial to determine the reason(s) for poor performance in order to select an appropriate intervention: • Skill Deficit: The student lacks the necessary skills to perform the academic task. • ‘Fragile’ Skills: The student possesses the necessary skills but is not yet fluent and automatic in those skills. • Performance (Motivation) Deficit: The student has the necessary skills but lacks the motivation to complete the academic task.

  13. Select a scientifically-based intervention likely to improve the student's academic functioning: Any intervention idea chosen for the student should be backed by scientific research (e.g., research articles in peer-reviewed professional journals) demonstrating that the intervention is effective in addressing the student’s underlying reason(s) for academic failure.

  14. Monitor academic progress frequently to evaluate the impact of the intervention: Under RTI, interventions are monitored frequently (e.g., weekly) using valid and reliable measures that are sensitive to short-term gains in student performance: • Measures for Basic Academic Skills: Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) probes are short, timed assessments that have been developed to measure phonemic awareness, oral reading fluency, math computation, writing, and spelling skills (Shinn, 1989). We have this in reading. Math and writing to come. • Measures for Classroom Academic and General Behaviors: • Daily Behavior Report Cards (DBRCs): These customized teacher rating forms allow the instructor to evaluate the student’s behaviors each day (Chafouleas et al. 2005). • Direct Observation: An external observer visits the classroom to observe the student’s rates of on-task and academically engaged behaviors. (Shapiro, 1996)

  15. If the student fails to respond to a series of several well-implemented interventions, consider a referral for a full psychoeducational evaluation. In the RTI model, the student would be referred for a full evaluation if… • A series of research-based interventions have been attempted. • There is documentation that the interventions were carried out as designed (treatment/intervention integrity). • Progress-monitoring data shows that the student failed to meet the goal set for his or her improvement (that is, the student shows a ‘discrepancy in rate of learning’ relative to grade-peers).

  16. Tier I‘School-Wide Screening & Group Intervention’ Tier II ‘Non-Responders’ to Tier I Are Identified & Given ‘Individually Tailored’ Interventions (e.g., peer tutoring/fluency) RTI: School-Wide Three-Tier Framework (Kovaleski, 2003; Vaughn, 2003) Tier III ‘Long-Term Programming for Students Who Fail to Respond to Tier II Interventions’ (e.g., Special Education)

  17. Implementing RTI: Next Steps Web resources for evidence-based intervention strategies • Big Ideas in Beginning Reading (U of Oregon):reading.uoregon.edu • What Works Clearinghouse (US Dept of Education): www.w-w-c.org • Intervention Central: www.interventioncentral.org

  18. Implementing RTI: Next Steps Web resources for progress-monitoring • CBM Warehouse: www.interventioncentral.org/htmdocs/interventions/cbmwarehouse.shtml • The Behavior Reporter (Behavior Report Card Generator): http://www.jimwrightonline.com/php/tbrc/tbrc.php

  19. For a comprehensive directory of up-to-date RTI Resources available for free on the Internet, visit RTI_Wire at:http://www.jimwrightonline.com/php/rti/rti_wire.php

  20. References • Chafouleas, S.M., McDougal, J.L., Riley-Tillman, T.C., Panahon, C.J., & Hilt, A.M. (2005). What do Daily Behavior Report Cards (DBRCs) measure? An initial comparison of DBRCs with direct observation for off-task behavior. Psychology in the Schools,42, 669-676. • Fuchs, L. (2003). Assessing intervention responsiveness: Conceptual and technical issues. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 172-186. • Hall, T. E., Watkins, M. W., & Worrell, F. C. (2002). Reading assessments for elementary schools. University Park, PA: CEDAR School Psychology Clinic. • Gresham, F. (2001). Responsiveness to Intervention: an Alternative Approach to the Identification of Learning Disabilities. Retrieved January 9, 2006, from http://www.air.org/ldsummit/download/Gresham Final 08-10-01.doc • Johnson, E., Mellard, D. F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M. A. (1006). Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it? National Research Center on Learning Disabilities: University of Kansas, Vanderbilt University.

  21. References Con’t • Kovaleski, J. F. (2003). The three-tier model of identifying learning disabilities: Critical program features and system issues. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO. • Shapiro, E. S. (1996). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford. • Shinn, M. R. (1989). Identifying and defining academic problems: CBM screening and eligibility procedures. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 90-129). New York: The Guilford Press. • Wright, J. (2005, Summer). Five interventions that work. NAESP [National Association of Elementary School Principals] Leadership Compass, 2(4) pp.1,6. • Wright, J., & Cleary, K. S. (2006). Kids in the tutor seat: Building schools' capacity to help struggling readers through a cross-age peer-tutoring program. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 99-107.

  22. END

More Related