Matching Interventions to Support Student Needs - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

matching interventions to support student needs n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Matching Interventions to Support Student Needs PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Matching Interventions to Support Student Needs

play fullscreen
1 / 91
Matching Interventions to Support Student Needs
123 Views
Download Presentation
regan-rutledge
Download Presentation

Matching Interventions to Support Student Needs

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Matching Interventions to Support Student Needs Robert Frantum-Allen, MA Gilpin Public Schools September 2014

  2. Intro and Norms

  3. The Trouble with Handouts  http://rcause.wikispaces.com • Paper on Specially Designed Instruction and Root Cause Analysis • Today’s Presentation • Sample Root Cause Analysis in Reading on 6 students • Blank Templates for Root Cause Analysis

  4. Outcomes

  5. Agenda

  6. Choosing an intervention is like choosing a diet

  7. Body of Evidence • Researched Diets- found a company that does something very unique and was intrigued right away…

  8. Customized

  9. Progress Monitored Average Weekly Blood Pressure

  10. Results 252 lbs 252 242 lbs 232 lbs 231 222 lbs 212 lbs 207 200 192 lbs 190 182 lbs 182 172 lbs 162 lbs 1 2 3 4 5 6

  11. Playing Darts in the Dark

  12. Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS) Integrated Continuum Academic Continuum Behavior Continuum Adapted from the OSEP TA Center for PBIS Adapted from the OSEP TA Center for PBIS

  13. What Does This Mean for Our School? Problem solving teams are looking at the body of evidence to determine need. A problem solving team can be a data team, student intervention team, a special team that was created to address a unique need or and IEP team Problem solving teams design a plan to address the problem. The plan is implemented by the designated personnel. The problem solving teams determines if the plan was effective. If the plan was not effective, attempts to adjust the plan accordingly should be made and re-implemented.

  14. Agenda

  15. data data data data data data data data data data constipation

  16. Fishbone diagram is used when…. … a team needs to study a problem/issue to determine the root cause. … a team wants to study all the possible reasons why a process is beginning to have difficulties, problems, or breakdowns. … a team needs to identify areas for data collection. … a team wants to study why a process is not performing properly or producing the designed results.

  17. 3) Label each bone with categories to be studied 2) List the problem in the head of the fish 4) Identify the factors within each category that maybe affecting the problem 1) Draw the fishbone diagram 5) Continue until you no longer get useful information 6) Analyze the results

  18. Phonological Awareness Alphabetic Principle What sources of data do we currently have for each of these categories? Reading Vocabulary and Comprehension Fluency

  19. Agenda

  20. Specific Learning Disability • Definition:  Specific Learning Disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell or do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.

  21. Psychological Processor

  22. Cognitive Sweat • She had a largepiece of birthday cake. • I would love to have a slice of cake. • The first slice was very little. • Is there a chance I could talk to the person in charge? • The housemouse also likes to eat cake. • Whereare you going with that cake?

  23. Why is there a silent e? 1. Cake, Slice 2. Love, Have 3. Large, Piece, Charge, Chance, Slice 4. Little 5. House, Mouse 6. Where, Are

  24. Executive Functioning

  25. Reasoning VERBAL NONVERBAL

  26. Reading Processors context run semantic /r/ /ŭ/ /n/ orthographic phonologic

  27. Brain Images Comparing 9-Year-Old Average Reader and 9-Year-Old Un-remediated Poor Reader

  28. Changes in Brain Activation Patterns in Response to Instruction p. 63

  29. Processing Speed rapid retrieval accuracy

  30. Language Processing

  31. Academic Fishbone

  32. Phonological Awareness Alphabetic Principle Reading Vocabulary and Comprehension Fluency

  33. Handwriting/ Keyboarding Spelling Writing Composition Grammar

  34. Number Sense Operational Sense Math Problem Solving Fluency

  35. LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION ● Background Knowledge ● Vocabulary Knowledge ● Language Structures ● Verbal Reasoning ● Literacy Knowledge SKILLED READING: fluent execution and coordination of word recognition and text comprehension. increasingly strategic WORD RECOGNITION ● Phonological Awareness ● Decoding (and Spelling) ● Sight Recognition increasingly automatic Reading: Scarborough's Rope Reading is a multifaceted skill, gradually acquired over years of instruction and practice.

  36. Subtypes of Reading Disability Phonology and language comprehension Fluency/naming speed and language comprehension Phonology and fluency/naming speed All three issues

  37. Fishbone Analysis Phonological Awareness (Blevins, Rosner and Words their Way) Alphabetic Principle (Core Phonics, Words their Way, LETRS Morphological Awareness) Morphology: Name: ________________ # of phoneme errors on spelling test: Alphabet Skills: Reading and Decoding: Spelling Skills: Rosner Auditory Analysis: Rhyme: Oddity Task: Oral Blending: Oral Segmentation: Phonemic Manipulation: # of Orthographic errors on spelling: Reading ORF Rate: Reading Level: ORF Accuracy: Oral Language Vocabulary: Color naming RAN: Site Words: Reading Vocabulary: Executive Functioning Skills: Reasoning Skills: Other: Vocabulary and Comprehension (DRA/SRI, Core Vocabulary and Critchlaw) Fluency (ORF, Fry and RAN)

  38. Agenda

  39. Case Study: Angela

  40. Case Study • K-2 Reached Benchmarks • 3rd Grade CSAP Satisfactory • 4th Grade CSAP P. Proficient • 5th Grade CSAP Unsatisfactory • Currently 6th Grade at a K-8 School • SRI Lexile- 498 or 2nd grade

  41. Case Study Student Intervention Team Academic Detectives • Read Naturally for 2 days a week • Guided Reading Plus for 3 days a week Progress Monitoring • Oral Reading Fluency – no progress • after 6 weeks.

  42. Case Study Special Education Program Manager • Called the program manager and not sure what to do • Review indicated a very poor BOE • A BOE was developed • GORT- showed she is at the 21%ile

  43. Phonological Awareness Alphabetic Principle Angela is struggling with reading Reading Level: SRI 498 GORT: 21%ile CSAP: Unsatisfactory DPS Benchmark (spring 2010) PP DRA Level 40 MAZE Passage: 38%ile Fluency Vocabulary and Comprehension

  44. Clues table tibl tabl tebl

  45. Clues

  46. Clues

  47. Clues