1 / 35

Creating an RTI Culture at the Building Level in Order to Make Sound Eligibility Decisions

Creating an RTI Culture at the Building Level in Order to Make Sound Eligibility Decisions. Oak Hills Local School District Cincinnati, Ohio UC Summer Institute June 14 &15, 2010. Keri Bennett, Ed.S . School Psychologist at C.O. Harrison Elementary

edith
Download Presentation

Creating an RTI Culture at the Building Level in Order to Make Sound Eligibility Decisions

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. Creating an RTI Culture at the Building Level in Order to Make Sound Eligibility Decisions Oak Hills Local School District Cincinnati, Ohio UC Summer Institute June 14 &15, 2010 Keri Bennett, Ed.S. School Psychologist at C.O. Harrison Elementary Chelsey Schneider, Ed.S. School Psychologist at Bridgetown MS Brooks Klosterman, M.Ed Regular Education Teacher at Bridgetown MS Jessica Fuhrman, Ed.S. School Psychologist at Oak Hills High School Amy McNabb, Ed.S. School Psychologist at Oak Hills High School

  2. Objectives • Demonstrate the shift from traditional intervention services to full RTI implementation • Provide examples of the application of RTI at the building level • Discuss how the implementation of RTI is building a culture for making sound eligibility decisions

  3. Rti past, present, and future at C.O. Harrison ElementaryKeri Bennett, ED.Sbennett_k@oakhills.hccanet.org

  4. COH demographics • Approximately 1000 students • 94.9% White, Non Hispanic • 9.8% Economically Disadvantaged • 11.0% Students identified with Disabilities • 1 Principal, 1 Assistant Principal • 2 school psychologists • COH rated “Excellent” for the past 7 years

  5. Past….2007-2008 • Universal Screening • DIBELS • All students 3x per year • Administered by classroom teachers • No fidelity checks

  6. Past….2007-2008 • Tier 2 Intervention • PALS, Corrective Reading, Sight Word and Repeated Reading groups • Standard protocol approach • Progress monitored bi-weekly • Delivered by intervention aides • Tier 3 Intervention • Ongoing problem solving for students not making adequate progress • Delivered by Intervention Specialist

  7. Past…2008-2009 • Universal Screening • AIMSweb Reading • All students 3x per year • Administered by District Team • Fidelity checks prior to each administration

  8. Past…2008-2009 • Tier 2 Intervention • PALS (Kindergarten-First) • Repeated Reading and Sight Word groups (Grade 2) • Corrective Reading (Grades 3-5) • Standard protocol approach • 30 minutes daily per grade level • Progress monitored weekly • Delivered by intervention aides • Tier 3 Intervention • Ongoing problem solving for students not making adequate progress • Delivered by Intervention Specialist

  9. Present…2009-2010 • Universal Screening • K-5 Reading measures 3x per year • K-3 numeracy measures 3x per year • Inter-rater reliability checks prior to each administration

  10. Present…2009-2010 • Tier 2 Intervention • PALS, Repeated Readings, Sight Word groups, and Corrective Reading continue • 6 Minute Solution added to Grade 3 • Weekly Progress Monitoring • Fidelity checks • Grade level team meetings once per month • Problem solving meetings for students not making adequate progress • Outcome Data • See handout

  11. Present…2009-2010 • Tier 3 Interventions • Ongoing problem solving for students not making adequate progress • Delivered by Intervention Specialist

  12. Future…2010-2011…and beyond • Universal Screening • Continue AIMSweb for literacy and numeracy • Tier 1 Instruction • Adopt Reading Street as core curriculum

  13. Future…2010-2011…and beyond • Tier 2 Intervention • My Sidewalks-literacy • Number Worlds-numeracy • Tier 3 Intervention • Ongoing problem solving for students not making adequate progress • Delivered by Intervention Aide and/or Intervention Specialist • Increase use of research based programs

  14. Rti past, present, and future at Bridgetown middle schoolChelsey Schneider, ED.SSchneider_C@oakhills.hccanet.orgBrooks Klosterman, ME.dklosterman_B@oakhills.hccanet.org

  15. BMS demographics • 622 students • 6th – 8th • 94.2% White, Non Hispanic • 11.7% Students with Disabilities • 1 Principal • 1 Assistant principal • 2 school psychologists • 38 Certified Teachers

  16. Core beliefs A. Student Learning B. Embraced Theory of Change C. Core leadership Team D. Knowledge Building E. Sustain success

  17. Past….2007-2008 • Tier 2 Intervention • Students selected OAA, and teacher recommendation • Teacher created strategies focusing OAA

  18. Past….2008-2009 • Universal Screening • Aimsweb • 3x per year • Administered by District Team

  19. Past….2008-2009 • Tier 2 Intervention • Students selected based on CBMs, OAA, and teacher recommendation • 3 groups per grade level • Teacher created strategies focusing on fluency, decoding & OAA

  20. Present…2009-2010 • Building Level • RTI academic team created • Year 1 of School-wide PBS • Outcome Data (see handout) • Universal Screening • All students assessed 3x per year • R-CBM and Maze • District screening team

  21. Present…2009-2010 • Tier 2 Intervention • Corrective Reading • Students selected based on CBM, OAA, and teacher recommendation • Tier 2 Outcome Data • See handout

  22. Present…2009-2010 • Tier 3 Intervention • 2-4 times per week • Small group and individual • Repeated reading with error correction

  23. Future…2010-2011…and beyond • Academic • Study skills & organization • Increase Tier 1 support • Balance focus of OAA and basic skills • Math Intervention • Behavior • Strengthen Tier 1 PBS support • Behavior screenings • Social Emotional Curriculum • Tier 2 behavior interventions • Mentoring Program • Check & Connect

  24. Rti past, present, and future at oak hills high schooljessicafuhrman, ed.sfuhrman_j@oakhills.hccanet.orgamymcnabb, ed.smcnabb_a@oakhills.hccanet.org

  25. Ohhs demographics • Approximately 2800 students • 95.1% White, Non Hispanic • 13.8% Students identified with Disabilities • 5 Principals • 5 Counselors • 2 school psychologists • High School rated “Excellent” for 2008-2009 school year

  26. Past….2007-2008 • Tier 2 Intervention • Algebra 1 Rescue! • Reading Rewards • Progress monitored bi-weekly by AIMSweb maze • No selection process

  27. Past…2008-2009 • Universal Screening • 9th and 10th grade • 3X per year • AIMSweb R-CBM and Maze • Tier 2 Intervention • Reading Rewards (grade 9) • Progress monitored bi-weekly using maze • Buckle Down OGT Prep (grade 10) • No selection process

  28. Present…2009-2010 • Universal Screening • 9th and 10th grade • 3X per year • R-CBM and Maze • Math concepts and Applications (MCAP)

  29. Present…2009-2010 • Tier 2 Intervention • Corrective Reading • Student Selection based on participation in a special education supplemental class • Progress Monitoring • Bi-weekly by AIMSweb maze • 4 times per year with R-CBM • Outcome Data • See handout

  30. Present…2009-2010 • Tiers 1, 2, and 3 • PBS training • Planning phase for Tier 2 and Tier 3 math and reading interventions

  31. Future…2010-2011…and beyond • Screening • New enrollments • At risk students • Maze • Universal screening at end of year • Tier 1 Instruction • PBS • RTI teams developed • Problem solving/referral process re-designed

  32. Future…2010-2011…and beyond • Tier 2 Intervention • Read 180 (grades 9 and 10) • Students selected based on Maze, 8th grade OAT, teacher recommendation • Progress monitored one time per month using maze • Data analyzed prior to end of each semester • Math intervention (grades 9 and 10) • Students selected based on Spring MCAP, OAT, teacher recommendation • Progress monitored one time per month with MCAP • Data analyzed prior to end of each semester

  33. Future…2010-2011…and beyond • Tier 2 Intervention • Structured study hall • Target: Organization, work completion and study skills • 9th grade regular education students • Students selected based core class failures, attendance, teacher recommendation

  34. Future…2010-2011…and beyond • Tier 3 Intervention • Corrective Reading (grades 9 and 10) • Students selected based on Spring Maze data, OAT, and teacher recommendation • Progress monitored bi-weekly using maze • Data analyzed monthly by Reading RTI team

  35. Making sound eligibility decisions as a district Problem Solving Process Policies and Procedures Manual Student Support Services Website

More Related