Gifted Education and Response to Intervention

1. Gifted Education and Response to Intervention Update on Gifted Education Workshop August 2013 Toddie Adams, Marshall County Schools

2. Screening children within the general curriculum Tiered instruction of increasing intensity Evidence-based instruction Close monitoring of student progress Informed decision making regarding next steps for individual students What is RtI?

3. 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) signed into law 2006 IDEA became effective RtI is an addition to IDEA • Rooted in special education • Developed from studies regarding IQ/achievement discrepancies • Evolved into an approach to identify and service students with reading disabilities • Currently implemented to include identification of low achieving students and provide instructional and behavioral interventions Evolution of RtI

4. New assessments with a revised accountability system • 2002: NCLB is passed • Goal: All students will reach proficiency by 2012 • Focus is on raising math and reading scores • Needs of high achieving and gifted students is questioned • 2010: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is passed • Goal: By 2020 the USA will lead the world in college completion • Grow all students Growing all Students

5. The Kentucky System of Interventions (KSI) was established by the Kentucky Department of Education. It is based on and includes the RtI model. What is KSI?

6. A Guide to the Kentucky System of Interventions http://education.ky.gov/educational/int/ksi/Documents/KSIRtIGuidanceDocument.pdf • Optimize instruction through accelerated learning targeted to student needs • Development of teacher expertise • Use data to collaborate • Close achievement gaps • Focus on student goals • Provide advanced instruction • Prepare students to be college and career ready Goals of KSI

7. The practice of Accelerated Learning Highly Effective Teaching and Learning RtI To reach the goals of Closing the achievement gap Readiness to learn at all levels Smooth student transition • Universal Screening/ Diagnostic Assessment • Data-Based Decision Making • Evidence-Based Instruction • Progress Monitoring • Tiered Service Delivery • Fidelity of Implementation • Family Involvement • Professional Development The KSI Model

8. Gifted Education and the RtI Model • RtI can be utilized for student growth in their area(s) of strength • Teachers/schools/districts are accountable for continuous progress of all students including high ability students • High level learners will be challenged in their area(s) of strengths Implications for Gifted Education

9. Screening children within the general curriculum Tiered instruction of increasing intensity Evidence-based instruction Close monitoring of student progress Informed decision making regarding next steps for individual students GT RtI

10. Literature addressing Response to Intervention and Gifted Education • Lack of literature regarding research combining gifted education and RtI • RtI was recently implemented in many states • GT Programs are not mandated in all states • Plans for integrating RtI within gifted programs are designed parallel to meeting needs of students requiring remediation • Implications for the impact of RtI on gifted education are discussed Research regarding GT RtI

11. Colorado Department of Education, 2008 “RtI embeds gifted education in the daily priorities of quality instruction. Academic, behavioral, and affective outcomes and growth, not solely enrichment, are the focus. Strength of RtI lies in the upfront planning and problem solving that uses data, strengths and interests of students to plan appropriate, rigorous and relevant instruction. Ongoing assessment continually contributes new data so that learning is dynamic and adjustments made according to an individual student’s need” District/State Policies

12. Montana Office of Public Instruction, 2009 “In gifted education, rather than remediation-based interventions, strength-based interventions and strength-based programming, are used to describe tiered instruction. The problem-solving process which uses data, strengths and interests of students to implement appropriate, rigorous and relevant curriculum and instruction are strengths of RtI” District/State Policies

13. A Guide to the Kentucky System of Interventions http://education.ky.gov/educational/int/ksi/Documents/KSIRtIGuidanceDocument.pdf The Kentucky System of Interventions (KSI) framework emphasizes optimizing instruction through targeted accelerated learning, development of teacher expertise and responsiveness to the needs of all learners. What is effective for every learner is a systematic and ongoing assessment of their academic and behavioral needs and using the data in collaborative conversations with parents/guardians and educators in the interest of preparing students to be college and career ready to live and work in a global society. Kentucky Department of Education

14. Traditional RtI GT RtI Students scoring above established criteria receive differentiated and advanced instruction Students scoring below established criteria receive intensive remedial instruction Universal Screening Hughes & Rollins, 2009

15. Traditional RtI GT RtI Abilities are identified within a nurturing system regardless of label or potentially biased teacher recommendations Students qualify for intervening services before “waiting to fail” Early Intervention Hughes & Rollins, 2009

16. Traditional RtI GT RtI The more intense the needs, the more intense and long-term interventions are provided The more intense the needs, the more intense and long-term interventions are provided Tiered System of Interventions Hughes & Rollins, 2009

17. Traditional RtI GT RtI The student receives instruction geared to particular needs; not a “one size fits all”accelerated program The student receives instruction geared to particular needs; not a “one size fits all”remedial program Fidelity of Intervention Hughes & Rollins, 2009

18. Traditional RtI GT RtI Documented student progress has a goal of moving a child from a less intensive to a more intensive tier of intervention as a child raises achievement levels Documented student progress has a goal of moving a child from a more intensive to a less intensive tier of intervention as a child raises achievement levels Progress Monitoring Hughes & Rollins, 2009

19. Traditional RtI GT RtI Training is provided for specific strategies of acceleration, enrichment, and differentiation that are effective with gifted learners Training is provided for specific, research-based interventions that are effective for struggling learners Professional Development Hughes & Rollins, 2009

20. Traditional RtI GT RtI Gifted education professionals collaborate with general education teachers to identify and serve gifted learners in need of differentiated services Greater collaboration is needed between special education, reading specialists, and other interventionists to identify and serve struggling learners Collaborative Structure Hughes & Rollins, 2009

21. Traditional RtI GT RtI Sharing information to and from families raises the achievement levels and effectiveness of interventions. Targeted interventions are built upon acquired information regarding interest areas and areas of strength Sharing information to and from families raises the achievement levels and effectiveness of interventions. Targeted interventions are built upon acquired information regarding interest areas and areas of strength Parental Involvement Hughes & Rollins, 2009

22. Traditional RtI GT RtI Students scoring above established criteria receive differentiated and advanced instruction Students scoring below established criteria receive intensive remedial instruction Resources Hughes & Rollins, 2009

23. Used to implement educational decisions in the RtI model • Implementation team • Principals • Counselors • Teachers • School Psychologists • FRYSC • GT Specialists • Curriculum Specialists • Responsible for administration of core curricula and intervention system through formative and summative assessments Standard Treatment Protocol Model Pulaski County Intervention System (PCIS) Appendix E, 2013

24. Used to guide the decision making process in the RtI model • Interventions in general education • Referral to special education or gifted education • Evaluation for special education eligibility or gifted education eligibility • Clarify the needs of individual students • Gather information to assist in decision making • Analyze data to assist in decision making • Plan and modify interventions Problem Solving Process Model Pulaski County Intervention System (PCIS) Appendix E, 2013

25. Pulaski County Intervention System (PCIS) Appendix E, 2013 Accelerated Academic Systems

26. Pulaski County Intervention System (PCIS) Appendix E, 2013 Key Strategies for Differentiated Instruction

27. Pulaski County Intervention System (PCIS) Appendix E, 2013

28. Ardoin, S. P., Witt, J. C., Connell, J. E., & Koenig, J. L. (2005). Application of a three-tiered response to intervention model for instructional planning, decision making, and the identification of children in need of services. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(4), 362-380. DOI: 10.1177/073428290502300405 Bianco, M. (2010). Strength-based RtI: Conceptualizing a multi-tiered system for developing gifted potential. Theory Into Practice, 49(4), 323-330. DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2010.510763 Coleman, M. R., & Hughes, C. E. (2009). Meeting the needs of gifted students within an RtI framework. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 14-17. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.proxy.lib.siu.edu/PDFS/EJ849371.pdf Colorado Department of Education (2008). Thinking points: Gifted student education in a response to interventions framework. Retrieved from http://www.cde.state.co.us/gt/download/pdf/GiftedRtI_thinking_points.pdf Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research &Practice, 18(3), 157-171. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.siu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4583c885- 2cf1-46ba-880c-368eacd37ef0%40sessionmgr104&vid=2&hid=111 Hughes, C. E. & Rollins, K. (2009). RtI for nurturing giftedness: Implications for the RtI school-based team. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 31-39. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.proxy.lib.siu.edu/PDFS/EJ849373.pdf References

29. Hughes, C. E., Rollins, K., Johnsen, S. K., Pereles, D. A., Omdal, S., Baldwin, L., … Coleman, M. R. (2009). Remaining challenges for the use of RtI with gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 58-61. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.proxy.lib.siu.edu/PDFS/EJ849376.pdf Kentucky Administrative Regulations: 704 KAR 3:285 (2008). Retrieved from http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/704/003/285.htm Kentucky Department of Education (2012). A guide to the kentucky system of interventions. Retrieved from http://education.ky.gov/educational/int/ksi/Documents/KSIRtIGuidanceDocument.pdf Montana Office of Public Instruction (2009). Response to intervention and gifted and talented education. Retrieved from http://opi.mt.gov/pub/RTI/Resources/RTI_Gifted_Talented.pdf National Association for Gifted Children (2011). Current definitions. Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=574 Pulaski County Intervention System (2013). Retrieved from http://rti--response-to-intervention.pulaski.schoolfusion.us/modules/locker/files/get_group_file.phtml? gid=1554345&fid=21686351&sessionid=924a02b4af920ee72c3cda6380e40e0d References

30. Rollins, K., Mursky, C. V., Shah-Coltrane, S., & Johnsen, S. K. (2009). RtI models for gifted children. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 20-29. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.proxy.lib.siu.edu/PDFS/EJ849372.pdf Simmons, D. C., Coyne, M. D., Kwok, O., McDonagh, S., Harn, B. A., & Kame'enui, E. J. (2008). Indexing response to intervention: A longitudinal study of reading risk from kindergarten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(2), 158-173. DOI: 10.1177/0022219407313587 United States Department of Education (2010). A blueprint for reform: The reauthorization of the elementary and secondary education act. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69(4), 391-401. Retrieved from http://www.metapress.com.proxy.lib.siu.edu/content/q742w7261667m47g/fulltext.pdf Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Small, S., & Fanuele, D. P. (2006). Response to intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between children with and without reading disabilities: Evidence for the role of kindergarten and first grade interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 157-169. Retrieved from http://ldx.sagepub.com.proxy.lib.siu.edu/content/39/2/157.full.pdf+html References