Plan Evaluation/Progress Monitoring Problem Identification What is the problem? Problem Analysis Why is it happening? Progress Monitoring Did it work? Intervention Planning and Implementation What should be done about it?

1. UNIVERSAL SCREENING AND BENCHMARKING: EARLY LITERACY MEASURES, AS DIBELS OR AIMSWEB CBM (KEY CRITICAL INDICATORS) FRAMEWORK FOR READING ASSESSMENT STRATEGIC MONITORING (ROI) PROGRESS MONITORING (ROI) SYSTEMATIC PROBLEM SOLVING PINPOINTING THE SPECIFIC AREA OF DIFFICULTY, DIAGNOSTIC INFORMATION TIER III TIER II TIER I 3 X PER YEAR EVERY OTHER WEEK OR MONTHLY EVERY WEEK OR 2

Tier 2: Strategic Monitoring of At Risk

Can also Progress Monitor Individual Tier 2 Students

Writing OBSERVABLE and MEASUREABLE Goals Goal Writing for Tier 2 (and Tier 3 and IEPs!)

Selecting Standards to Write Goals 1.Using Linkages to High Stakes Tests 2.Using Normative Growth Rates 3.Using Norms (Local or National) 1. Using Linkages to High Stakes Tests 2.Using Normative Growth Rates 3.Using Norms (Local or National) 1.Using Linkages to High Stakes Tests 2.Using Normative Growth Rates 3.Using Norms (Local or National) Tier 3 Tier 2 Tier 1

1. Using Norms (Local and National ) The desired outcome is to have the student read like a average reader at a certain period in the school year. Refer to local norms or national aggregated data for the goal. Example: Lily is a 3rd grade student who reads 42 WRC in the fall of the year. Her goal is to read like an average 3rd grade student by the end of the year.

Examples of Norms In 30 weeks Lily will read 112 Words Correctly in 1 minute from a randomly selected 3rd grade passage.

2. Using Linkages to High Stakes Tests The desired outcome is to have the student meet standards on High Stakes Tests. Refer to: –Illinois AIMSweb Standards (Cut Scores for ISAT) –Oregon DIBELS Standards (Cut Scores for Oregon State Test) Example: 1)Lily is a 3rd grade student who reads 42 WRC in one minute in the fall of the year. Her goal is to meet standards on High Stakes Tests.

Illinois AIMSweb Standards (Cut Scores for ISAT) In 30 weeks Lily will read 115 Words Correctly in 1 minute from a randomly selected 3rd grade passage.

3. Using Normative Growth Rates The desired outcome that that the rate of growth of the student equals or exceeds that of a same grade student. Refer to Researched Based Normative Growth Rates or Aimsweb local or normative aggregated growth rates. Use the equation: Goal= Current Performance + (Rate of Growth X Number of weeks) Example: Lily is a 3rd grade student who reads 42 WRC in one minute in the fall of the year. Her goal is to make an ambitious rate of growth when compared to her same grade peers.

Example

Realistic and Ambitious Reading Goals Based on Normative Sample of Student Receiving Standard Reading Instruction Fuchs, Fuchs, Fernstrom, Germann, and Hamlett (1993) Grade Level Passages Realistic GoalAmbitious Goal WRC per week.65 WRC per week 5.5 WRC per week.8 WRC per week 4.85 WRC per week1.1 WRC per week 31.0 WRC per week1.5 WRC per week WRC per week WRC per week Goal= Current Performance + (Rate of Growth X Number of weeks) Lily’s Goal= 42 words read + (1.5 WRC per week X 33 weeks)= 91.5 WRC

Plan Evaluation/Progres Monitoring Problem Identification What is the problem? Problem Analysis Why is it happening? Progress Monitoring Did it work? Intervention Planning and Implementation What should be done about it?

To Evaluate your Tier 2 plans, Grade Level Teams must know: Decision Rules Interpreting progress monitoring graphs. Interpreting boxplots to inform whether grade level discrepancy is reducing and amount of need.

To make these decisions about Movement through the Tiers, you need: Decision Rules

Decision Rules: Linking RtI to Intervention Decisions Positive, Questionable, Poor Response Intervention Decision Based on RtI (General Guidelines) –Positive Continue intervention until student reaches benchmark (at least). Fade intervention to determine if student has acquired functional independence. –Questionable Increase intensity of current intervention for a short period of time and assess impact. If rate improves, continue. If rate does not improve, return to problem solving. –Poor Return to problem solving for new intervention

Data Decision Rules 3-5 Points Above the Aimline IF 3-5 Data Points are Consistent AND Above the Aimline Raise Goal, Consider Need for Program, Fade the Intervention, or that Problem is Resolved

Data Decision Rules 3-5 Points Below the Aimline IF 5 Data Points are Consistent AND Significantly Lower than the Aimline CONSIDER Changing the Intervention, Especially if Integrity of Intervention is High, or Cycling back through the Problem Solving Process

Data Decision Rules If LOTS of Variability in the Data Points: CONSIDER Examining Integrity of Intervention, Differences in Assessment Materials, Tester, or Influence of Student Motivation OR whether student is still in emerging stage of skill development

How Much Data Do You Need for Trendlines & Visual Analysis? Generally, MORE Data (Getting to at least 5-7 data points) is BEST. Make Decisions About Progress More Accurate But Come at a Cost of Lost Critical Time So, Increase Data Collection Frequency When These Issues are Apparent Severe Problems, New Interventions Thinking Required Sometimes Ineffective Interventions are Obvious!

When analyzing and evaluating data, you look at progress, discrepancy, and need

Student Progress Monitoring: Is the student benefiting from the intervention? Is the student’s rate of improvement sufficient? Does the intervention need to be modified? Change the intervention plan immediately Goal/Aimline Trendline Data points Error rates Intervention line

Monitoring a Specific Student’s RTI

Student Progress Monitoring: Is the student making progress from the intervention?

Educational Benefit/Progress?

Educational Benefit?

Reading and Interpreting a Boxplot

Student Scores- Range from 190 to 15 Student Scores- Correct Words per Minute outlier

Student Scores- Correct Words per Minute Box Plot draws a box around the range of student scores from the 90%ile to 10%ile: %ile 75%ile 50%ile 25%ile 10%ile Above 90%ile Below 10%ile

Amy’s Educational Need is Measured by the PERFORMANCE DISCREPANCY No Significant Discrepancy Educational Need

More Severe Educational Need Billy’s Educational Need Significant Performance Discrepancy

Data on Closing of the Performance Discrepancy

Some Potential Educational Need, Significant Educational Benefit: Maintain the General Education Program (Tier 2) IS THIS STUDENT REDUCING THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN HIMSELF AND GRADE LEVEL PEERS? Rate of Improvement that is REDUCING the Gap

Significant Educational Need, No Significant Educational Benefit: Change the Program IS THIS STUDENT REDUCING THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN HIMSELF AND GRADE LEVEL PEERS?

Monitoring Progress at all Tiers : Benchmark Assessment to Measure Educational Need and Benefit for All Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, was provided to the child's parents. Identified as At Risk and Early Intervention Educational Need Reduced with Clear Educational Benefit

Decision Rules: What is a “Good” Response to Intervention? Positive Response –Gap is closing –Can extrapolate point at which target student will “come in range” of peers--even if this is long range Questionable Response –Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still widening –Gap stops widening but closure does not occur Poor Response –Gap continues to widen with no change in rate.

p. 10

A. Is the student making progress toward the goal?

Monitoring a Specific Student’s RTI

Monitoring A Specific Student’s RTI

B. Is the student decreasing the discrepancy between him/her and the general education peers?

Some Potential Educational Need, Significant Educational Benefit: Maintain the General Education Program (Tier 2) IS THIS STUDENT REDUCING THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN HIMSELF AND GRADE LEVEL PEERS? Rate of Improvement that is REDUCING the Gap

Significant Educational Need, No Significant Educational Benefit: Change the Program IS THIS STUDENT REDUCING THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN HIMSELF AND GRADE LEVEL PEERS?

C. Is the plan able to be maintained in the general education setting ?

Page 10

Summary Tier 2: Standard protocol or Problem solving approach Focus on essential skills Most likely, more EXPOSURE and more FOCUS of core instruction. Plan Instructional Enhancements. Criterion for effectiveness is 70% of students receiving Tier 2 will reach benchmarks

Table Talk Activity #3. Discuss your plan for implementing Tier 2: Training of Grade Level Teams: -Instruction. Enhancements -Interventions: Problem Solving Standard Protocol -A COMBINATION OF ALL (Remember your data guides these decisions) -Evaluation of Data Note the Data Discussion form in your Workbook p. 8

P. 9