An Introduction to RTI and the ORTIi Project David Putnam, Jr., Ph.D. ORTIi Annual Conference April, 2016 This general session will provide an overview of RTI and the Oregon RTI project. Essential features, myths and realities, and implementation considerations will be examined. Benefits and outcomes, taken from both the research literature and from districts across Oregon, will be presented.

BIG IDEAS Overview of RTI and ORTIi Implementation considerations Essential features, myths and realities Benefits and outcomes This session will provide an overview of a healthy RTI system.  We will review the essential components of RTI, describe the dynamic process of data-based decision-making, highlight “Myths”, and clarify “Facts”. This session will also outline the service delivery model of the Oregon RTIi project and provide participants with an understanding of what it means to participate in the ORTIi project.

Harmonic Convergence and Golden Opportunity EBP DBDM Law, Policy, Economics Neuroscience Implementation Science Skilled Educators RTI/ MTSS Convergence of factors. Ven diagram for taking notes. Colored pens. Data systems—DIBELS, etc.; DBDM; Technology to store an actually use display analyze data. Shift to accountability—(Charts and graphs video) Evidence- based practices. We know what works! Hattie--visible learning. Dave shared this last year. Use Jon’s slide Change to a culture of data Policy and practices: IDEA n RTI, OSEP Neuroscience Implementation science

But we are Failing Far Too Many Students NAEP OAKS DIBELS, EasyCBM, AIMSweb College & Career Readiness CCSS

How are we doing? Compared to others..

Proficiency: What States Say versus What NAEP Says Each state defines for itself what “proficient” means; some states have a rigorous definition, while others are less strict in their standards. To see how states compare, ECF has published charts showing the percentage of students deemed proficient in various subjects and grade levels and compared them to percentages reported for each state by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, or “The Nation’s Report Card”), considered to be the gold standard. See how your state fares in the following areas: www.instructionalcoach.org

Oregon Reading Achievement Gap 2013-2014

Overview of RTI and ORTIi

Oregon Response to Instruction and Intervention Vision Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve… every day. Mission Cultivate the thinking and skills in leadership at all levels to build and sustain a comprehensive multi-level system of prevention and support that identifies and serves the instructional needs of all children.

Oregon RTI Project Growth & Lessons Learned TTSD Prior to Contract with ODE: Implementing PBIS District Wide Installing RTI for ALL and SLD Working with ODE on Policy and Procedures

Cadre 1: 2005-2006 # of Districts: 4 % of Oregon Student Population Pendleton Tigard-Tualatin Sheridan Ontario Roseburg % of Oregon Student Population # of Districts: 4

Cadre 2: 2006-2007 # of Districts: 13 % of Oregon Student Population North Clackamas Ione Hood River Canby Pilot Rock Crow-Applegate-Lorane Bethel Lowell Nyssa % of Oregon Student Population # of Districts: 13

Cadre 3: 2007-2008 # of Districts: 18 % of Oregon Student Population Astoria Sherwood Nestucca Valley Scio Baker Grants Pass % of Oregon Student Population # of Districts: 18

Leadership Matters….Most!!! Cadre 4: 2008-2009 Leadership Matters….Most!!! Hermiston Seaside Fern Ridge Central Curry % of Oregon Student Population # of Districts: 22

Its all about the Core Cadre 5: 2009-2010 # of Districts: 28 Knappa Cascade Springfield Crook County Bend-LaPine North Bend % of Oregon Student Population # of Districts: 28

Go Slow to Go Fast Cadre 6: 2010-2011 # of Districts: 37 Parkrose* Gresham-Barlow* Estacada Lebanon Sweet Home Sisters Bandon Glendale Central Point % of Oregon Student Population # of Districts: 37

Why & How Before What Cadre 7: 2011-2012 Cadre 7: 2011-2012 St. Helens David Douglas Junction City Yoncalla North Lake Paisley Klamath County Lake County % of Oregon Student Population # of Districts: 45

Prof. Learning & Transfer of Knowledge Cadre 8: 2012-2013 Clatskanie* Morrow Forest Grove North Powder North Marion Mitchell McKenzie* John Day Reedsport Butte Falls % of Oregon Student Population # of Districts: 55

Distributed Practice: Repeated Trainings Cadre 9: 2013-2014 Rainer Gladstone Mapleton *Projected population % based on 2012-2013 enrollment data Harney County Coquille Sutherlin Port Orford Brookings-Harbour % of Oregon Student Population* # of Districts: 63 *Projected

Cadre 9.2: 2013-2014 TTSD # of Districts: 72 BLSD OSD RSD Clatskanie Milton-Freewater North Wasco Jewell TTSD BLSD OSD *Projected population % based on 2012-2013 enrollment data Creswell RSD Eagle Point Plush Adel Three Rivers Klamath Falls City % of Oregon Student Population* # of Districts: 72 *Projected

Culturally Responsive Practices School Culture and Culturally Responsive Practices Cadre 10: 2014-2015 Scappoose Mollala River Neah-Kah-Nie Parkrose Gaston TTSD Jefferson County Jefferson Pine-Eagle Monroe Albany Marcola BLSD OSD *Projected population % based on 2013-2014 enrollment data McKenzie Harney ESD Crane Diamond Double O Drewsey Frenchglen Pine Creek South Harney Suntex RSD Pinehurst % of Oregon Student Population* # of Districts: 84 *Projected

Culturally Responsive Practices School Culture and Culturally Responsive Practices Cadre 10: 2014-2015 Scappoose Mollala River Neah-Kah-Nie Parkrose Gaston TTSD Jefferson County Middle School: Seaside Sisters Sutherlin Sweet Home Jefferson Pine-Eagle Monroe Albany Marcola BLSD OSD *Projected population % based on 2013-2014 enrollment data McKenzie Harney ESD Crane Diamond Double O Drewsey Frenchglen Pine Creek South Harney Suntex RSD Pinehurst % of Oregon Student Population* # of Districts: 89 *Projected

Culturally Responsive Practices School Culture and Culturally Responsive Practices Cadre 10: 2015-2016 Scappoose Mollala River Neah-Kah-Nie Parkrose Gaston TTSD Jefferson County Math: Baker Bethel Crook County Grants Pass N. Clackamas Jefferson Pine-Eagle Monroe Albany Marcola BLSD OSD *Projected population % based on 2013-2014 enrollment data McKenzie Harney ESD Crane Diamond Double O Drewsey Frenchglen Pine Creek South Harney Suntex RSD Pinehurst % of Oregon Student Population* # of Districts: 91 *Projected

ORTIi Today 2015-16 2nd year of a three year contract With option of three year extension Moved from 5 to 3 years “Time is of the essence” Added MS Cadre last year Added Math cadre this year Focus on Culturally Responsive Instruction and closing the achievement gap

Essential Features of RTI

Technical & Adaptive Support Data- Based Decision Making ORTIi Essential Components ORTIi Essential Components SLD Decision Making Vision Standards of Practice Communi c-ation Technical & Adaptive Support Teaming Structures Data- Based Decision Making Decision Rules Ongoing & Embedded : Training Coaching Fidelity Progress Monitoring Interventions Screening/Early Warning System Culture: High expectations for all student populations, belief that all student populations can learn, belief that the measurement of how well I teach is how well they learn Leadership: Teaming/DBDM: Disaggregate data, Professional Learning & Support:d Core: Sheltered instruction, implicit, opportunities to respond, Core/Coordinated Literacy Leadership Teaming/Data-Based Decision Making Professional Learning & Support Culture High Expectations For ALL Student Populations

SPED referral INSTRUCTION/ BEHAVIOR DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING ASSESSMENT INSTRUCTION/ BEHAVIOR DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING Comprehensive Evaluation SPED referral Formal Diagnostic As needed Tier 3 Individualized Intervention Individual Problem Solving Team 6-8 weeks Individual Problem Solving Team Progress Monitoring Weekly-Monthly Tier 2/3 Supplemental Intervention Tier 2/3 Supplemental Intervention Intervention Review Team 6-8 weeks Parent notified at every red flag Individual Education Program (IEP) Universal Screening 3 times/year Research-Based Core Curriculum w/ Strong Instruction Schoolwide Screening reviewed 3 times/year

RTI Myths and Facts

Myth Fact

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples

Response to Intervention Myth #1: This too shall pass Response to Intervention Historically speaking, RTI is about effective practices for all students Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004) 2000’s 1990’s 1980’s 1970’s 1960’s National Reading Panel Multi-tiered instruction Progress monitoring Formative evaluation Problem Solving Model Direct Instruction Curriculum-Based Measurement

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples 2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples 2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification 2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students and assess SLD

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples 2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification 2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students 3. RTI is just about interventions

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples 2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification 2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students 3. RTI is just about interventions 3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support

It’s all about core instruction

“RTI Kids” ALL your students

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples 2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification 2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students 3. RTI is just about interventions 3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support 4. RTI looks the same in every school/district

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples 2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification 2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students 3. RTI is just about interventions 3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support 4. RTI looks the same in every school/district 4. RTI is uniquely designed at each building

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples 2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification 2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students 3. RTI is just about interventions 3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support 4. RTI looks the same in every school/district 4. RTI is uniquely designed for each building 5. Using RTI puts you at severe risk of child find litigation

Myth Fact 1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”) 1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples 2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification 2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students 3. RTI is just about interventions 3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support 4. RTI looks the same in every school/district 4. RTI is uniquely designed for each building 5. Using RTI puts you at significant risk for litigation 5. RTI provides a proactive and legally robust way to identify students as SLD

RTI for SLD is Legally, Procedurally, and Ethically the Right Thing to Do IDEA 2004: All states MUST permit the use of RTI Primary features of RTI required for ALL SLD evaluations regardless of method RTI Approach better serves the needs of all students Research-based interventions can change a child’s brain and skills from disabled to not-disabled Federal Register and OARS explicit that cognitive evaluation is NOT REQUIRED Few challenges to RTI have reached the courts and the majority of decisions have been deferential to districts

Benefits & Outcomes

Impact on SPED: Research Support “Use of RTI has resulted in lower rates of SLD (Burns, Appleton, & Stehouwer, 2005) improved proportionality or indicators of equity, earlier delivery of special education services, and increased student achievement (Marston, Muyskens, Lau, & Canter, 2003)” A. M. VanDerheyden & M. K. Burns (2010)

ORTIi vs. Non OrRTI District Comparison Since the inception of Oregon RTI in 2005-2006, students in school districts participating in Oregon RTI were more likely to meet or exceed on OAKS Reading than students in Oregon school districts non participating in Oregon RTI, in any given year.

20/30 or 67% of ORTIi districts outperformed the state average % of 3rd Graders Passing SBAC (Reading) by District Economically Disadvantaged These are district that had five years to build their system. Majority of them are outperforming the state for economically disadvantaged students State Average - 33.4% 20/30 or 67% of ORTIi districts outperformed the state average

% of 3rd Graders Passing SBAC (Reading) by District Hispanic/Latino These are district that had five years to build their system. Majority of them are outperforming the state for Hispanic/Latino students State Average – 26.9% 16/22 or 73% of ORTIi districts outperformed the state average

5 year change in % of students (K-5) at or above benchmark by school 11 schools Out of all the schools in Cadres 1 and 2 that had complete DIBELS data for the first 5 years: 47 schools increased the percentage of kids at or above benchmark (based on K-5 DIBELS) 11 schools did not increase the percentage of kids at or above benchmark (based on K-5 DIBELS) Or another way to put it – 81% of schools in Cadres 1 and 2 improved student achievement, while 19% did not. 47 schools, 81%

5 year change in % of students (K-5) well below benchmark/intensive by school 41 schools, 71% Out of all the schools in Cadres 1 and 2 that had complete DIBELS data for the first 5 years: 41 schools decreased in the percentage of kids well below benchmark/intensive (based on K-5 DIBELS) 17 schools did not decrease the percentage of kids well below benchmark/intensive (based on K-5 DIBELS) Or another way to put it – 71% of schools in Cadres 1 and 2 decreased their population of students with intensive needs, while 29% did not. 17 schools

The Importance of Effective Core Instruction (Cadre 1)

Cadre 1: Core Implementation School has 90-minute (or less) reading block* (interventions occur WITHIN the core) *60 minute block for ½ day kindergarten In Cadre 1, schools that reported they did not develop their core instructional program only saw an increase of 1.7% (over the first 5 years of implementation) in the percentage of students meeting the benchmark on the DIBELS reading assessment (Kindergarten through 5th grade). +1.7% *K – NWF; 1st-5th – grade ORF

Cadre 1: Core Implementation School has 90-minute reading block* (interventions occur OUTSIDE of the core) In Cadre 1, schools that reported they created a 90 minute block for reading, but did not ensure fidelity of implementation within that 90 minutes saw an increase of 8.3% (over the first 5 years of implementation) in the percentage of students meeting the benchmark on the DIBELS reading assessment (Kindergarten through 5th grade). +8.3% +1.7% *K – NWF; 1st-5th – grade ORF

Cadre 1: Core Implementation School has a 90-minute reading block* (interventions occur OUTSIDE of the core) AND Common, agreed-upon grade-level instructional strategies. +16.5% In Cadre 1, schools that reported they created a 90 minute block for reading AND ensured fidelity of implementation of curriculum and instruction within that 90 minutes saw an increase of 16.5% (over the first 5 years of implementation) in the percentage of students meeting the benchmark on the DIBELS reading assessment (Kindergarten through 5th grade). +8.3% +1.7% *K – NWF; 1st-5th – grade ORF

What Matters Most is… …what teachers do

Districts Implementing RTI Effectively

Tigard-Tualatin School District % of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading (difference from Oregon State average) School Year School Year

Baker School District Cadre 3 % of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading (difference from Oregon State average) School Year = Year 1 in OrRTI

Central Curry School District Cadre 4 % of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading (difference from Oregon State average) School Year = Year 1 in OrRTI

Bend-LaPine School District Cadre 5 % of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading (difference from Oregon State average) School Year = Year 1 in OrRTI

Bandon School District Cadre 6 % of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading (difference from Oregon State average) School Year = Year 1 in OrRTI

Sisters School District Cadre 6 % of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading (difference from Oregon State average) School Year = Year 1 in OrRTI

Identification Rates: OrRTI Avg. % of Students Identified SLD 24 out of 29 districts moved in the direction of the mean State Average: 2011 3.1 OrRTI Cadres 1-6 Prior to Entering 4.7 OrRTI Cadres 1-6 in 2011 (at least 1 year after entering) 3.5 Reduction 26%

How do we support the HOW and the WHAT? Conference style trainings with a twist On-site coaching, consultation, and co-training Lab School visits Remote Consultation Web-based resources www.oregonrti.org 1 Goal: Help districts build internal capacity to Train Sustain Innovate

Install, Implement, Refine Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Why & How Culture Leadership, DBDM, PL TIER 1 Core/Co. Lit EWS/Screen 100% Mtgs TIER 2/3 Interventions X Placement Prog. Mon. Int. Rev. Mtg. SPED IPS/SLD

Opportunities with ORTIi Applications for fall of 2017-18 available Spring 2016-17 (anticipated): Elementary Literacy Middle School Literacy Elementary Math Applications for fall of 2018-19 available Spring 2017-18 (anticipated):

Thank You! David Putnam, Director, ORTIi dputnam@ttsd.k12.or.us