Esu 1 matthew burns ph d
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 47

ESU #1 Matthew Burns, Ph.D. PowerPoint PPT Presentation


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

ESU #1 Matthew Burns, Ph.D. RTI = MTSS. The systematic use of assessment data to most efficiently allocate resources in order to enhance learning for all students. Burns & VanDerHeyden, 2006. MTSS and Problem-Solving. TIER III. Measurement Precision. TIER I I.

Download Presentation

ESU #1 Matthew Burns, Ph.D.

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


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

ESU #1Matthew Burns, Ph.D.


Rti mtss

RTI = MTSS

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

Burns & VanDerHeyden, 2006


Mtss and problem solving

MTSS and Problem-Solving

TIER III

Measurement Precision

TIER I I

Measurement Frequency

Problem-Analysis

TIER I


Problem solving

Problem Solving

  • Tier I – Identify discrepancy between expectation and performance for class or individual (Is it a classwide problem?)

  • Tier II – Identify discrepancy for individual. Identify category of problem. (What is the category of the problem?)

  • Tier III – Identify discrepancy for individual. Identify causal variable. (What is the causal variable?)


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

Sensitivity = a / (a + c) = .86 for ORF and .31 for F&P,

Specificity = d / (b + d) = .78 for ORF and .66 for F&P,

Overall Correct Classification = (a + d) / N = .80 for ORF and .54 for F&P


Four purposes of assessment

Four Purposes of Assessment

Program evaluation: How is the education system working for students overall?

  • State test

    Screening: Which of my students are not meeting grade level expectations given Universal Instruction?

  • E.g., MAP

    Diagnostic: What are the specific needs of students who struggle with math?

    E.g., measures of specific skills

    Monitoring Progress: What does the student’s growth look like?

    E.g., CBM


Path to reading excellence in school sites

Path to Reading Excellence in School Sites

w

www.cehd.umn.edu/reading/PRESS/default.html


Grade level team meeting

Grade Level Team Meeting

  • Is there a classwide problem?

  • Who needs Tier 2?

  • Did we miss anyone?

  • What should we do for Tier 2?

  • Should we go to Tier 3?


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


First question classwide or individual problem

First Question – Classwide or Individual Problem


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


Classwide intervention http kc vanderbilt edu pals

ClasswideInterventionhttp://kc.vanderbilt.edu/pals


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

Partner Reading

Partnerships

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


Procedure

Procedure

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


Timeline

Timeline

Collect Data: Pre-test (fluency and comprehension)

  • Day 1: Train Students on Set Up Procedures and Partner Reading, Practice Reading for 10 minutes, Error Correction

  • Day 2: Train Students on Paragraph Shrinking, Practice Reading for 10 minutes

  • Day 3-10: Partner Reading, Paragraph Shrinking 15 minutes every day

    Collect Data: Post-test(fluency and comprehension)

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


Partner reading

Partner Reading

RULES

  • First Reader reads for 5 minutes.

  • Second Reader reads the same text for 5 minutes.

  • Second Reader retells for 1 minute.

Talk only to your partner and only talk about Partner Reading

Keep your voice low

Help your partner

Try your best!

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


Paragraph shrinking

Paragraph Shrinking

  • Name the most important who or what.

  • Tell the most important thing about the who or what.

  • Say the main idea in 10 words or less.

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

STOP. That word is______________

What word?

______________________

Correction Procedures

Good Job!

Go back and read that line again.

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


What we found 3 rd grade partner reading data

What we found: 3rd grade Partner Reading data

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


What we found 3 rd grade partner reading data1

What we found: 3rd grade Partner Reading data

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


Growth from winter to spring class wide interventions 10 classrooms k 3

Growth from Winter to SpringClass-Wide Interventions10 Classrooms K-3


Growth from winter to spring no class wide interventions 11 classrooms k 3

Growth from Winter To SpringNO Class-Wide Interventions11 Classrooms K-3


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

Class-wide Interventions Implemented in 10 of the 21 Classes Below Winter Benchmark:9 of the 10 Above Spring Benchmark


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

NO Class-wide Intervention Implemented in 11 Classes Below Winter Benchmark2 of the 11 Above Spring Benchmark


Step 2 who needs tier ii also did we miss anyone

Step 2 – Who Needs Tier IIAlso – Did we miss anyone?


Reading interventions for tier ii

Reading Interventions for Tier II

  • PALS

  • HOSTS

  • Read Naturally

  • Rewards

  • Reading Rockets

  • Etc., etc., etc.

PROFICIENT READING


National reading panel

National Reading Panel

  • Is phonemic awareness instruction effective in helping children learn to read?

  • Reviewed 52 studies of PA instruction.

  • Three general outcomes were explored

    • PA tasks such as phoneme manipulation,

    • spelling,

    • and reading tasks such as word reading, pseudoword reading, reading comprehension, oral text reading, reading speed, time to reach a criterion of learning, and miscues


National reading panel results

National Reading Panel Results

  • PA instruction demonstrated better efficacy over alternative instruction models or no instruction

  • Improved PA measures (strong), reading (d = .53) and spelling skills

  • Teaching one or two PA skills was preferable to teaching three or more

  • PA instruction benefited reading comprehension (Ehri et al.).


Means and ranges of effect sizes by reading outcome measure

Means and Ranges of Effect Sizes by Reading Outcome Measure


Tier ii interventions

Tier II Interventions

  • PALS

  • HOSTS

  • Read Naturally

  • Rewards

  • Reading Rockets

  • Etc., etc., etc.

Phonemic Awareness

Phonics

Fluency

Vocabulary and Comprehension


Assess 4 nrp areas

Assess 4 NRP Areas

  • Phonemic Awareness

    • Phoneme segmentation fluency

  • Phonics

    • Nonsense word fluency (WJ Pseudoword)

  • Fluency

    • Oral reading fluency (TOSCRF)

  • Vocabulary/Comprehension


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

`


Comparison of targeted and comprehensive

Comparison of Targeted and Comprehensive

  • 306 second-grade and 303 third-grade students

  • Attended one of six elementary schools in an urban school district

  • 51.4% females, 14% white students, and 80% were eligible for the FRPL

  • Leveled Literacy Intervention

  • PRESS Interventions (comprehension, fluency, decoding, phonemic awareness)


Esu 1 matthew burns ph d

ACCURACY

> 93%

Fluency intervention

Minnesota Center for Reading Research


Burns258@umn edu

[email protected]


  • Login