The Effectiveness of Standardized versus Individualized Interventions in Reading Melissa Coolong-Chaffin, PhD, NCSP Michael Axelrod, PhD, LP, NCSP Kaitlin.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Amber Zank, M.S.E. Michael Axelrod, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin- Eau Claire NASP Conference 2011 Training Individuals to Implement a Brief Experimental.
Advertisements

Response to Intervention (RtI) in Primary Grades
Chapter 9 Fluency Assessment Jhanyce A. Acosta. What? * Fluency Assessment -a method of listening to students read aloud in order to gathering their data,
Implementing Fluency Interventions Identified through Brief Experimental Analysis Doug Penno, Ph.D. Pamela Fields, Ed.D. Michelle L. Hinzman, Ed.S. Barbara.
Academic Data for Instructional Decisions: Elementary Level Dr. Amy Lingo, Dr. Nicole Fenty, and Regina Hirn Project ABRI University of Louisville Project.
Building Level Benchmark Data This represents the percent of students who demonstrated the following proficiency levels on benchmark assessments. AP-Advanced.
Progress Monitoring project DATA Assessment Module.
Margaret D. Anderson SUNY Cortland, April, Federal legislation provides the guidelines that schools must follow when identifying children for special.
Novice Webinar 2 Overview of the Four Types and Purposes of Assessment.
Universal Screening: Answers to District Leaders Questions Are you uncertain about the practical matters of Response to Intervention?
C4K – Building an efficient and effective delivery system to impact critical outcomes for kids Our initial focus as we build this system is early literacy.
Response to Intervention RTI – SLD Eligibility. What is RTI? Early intervention – General Education Frequent progress measurement Increasingly intensive.
Assessing the Social Acceptability of Brief Experimental Analysis in the Context of a Complete Reading Intervention Program Greta Fenske, Erin Liffrig,
RtI Assessment CED 613. Universal Screening What is it and what does it Evaluate? What is the fundamental question it is asking? What is the ultimate.
Curriculum Based Evaluations Informed Decision Making Leads to Greater Student Achievement Margy Bailey 2006.
Universal Screening and Progress Monitoring Nebraska Department of Education Response-to-Intervention Consortium.
RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION Georgia’s Pyramid. Pyramid Vocabulary  Formative Assessment  Universal Screening  Intervention  Progress Monitoring.
 “Fluency assessment consists of listening to students read aloud and collecting information about their oral reading accuracy, rate, and prosody.” (Page.
From Data to Dialogue: Facilitating meaningful change with reading data Ginny Axon misd.net) Terri Metcalf
Chapter 9 Fluency Assessment Tina Jensen. What? Fluency Assessment Consists of listening to students read aloud for a given time to collect information.
Response to Intervention in The Social Domain. Response to Intervention (RTI) Response to evidence-based interventions (Elliott, Witt, Kratchowill, &
An Introduction to Intensive Intervention Lou Danielson, Ph.D. Center Director October 2012.
Pearson Copyright Tier Reading Model 3/26/08.
Introduction Failure to develop basic reading ability during the first few years of school has been shown to be related to a number of academic, economic,
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Minnesota Center for Reading Research 175 Peik Hall 159 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN Contacts: Kathrin Maki:
Assessment to Improve Reading: Response To Intervention (RTI) Model
Response to Intervention RTI Data Challenge: Setting Individual RTI Academic Goals Using Research Norms for Students Receiving.
Blending Academics and Behavior Dawn Miller Shawnee Mission School District Steve Goodman Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and Learning.
Response to Intervention
Training Undergraduate Students to Implement Brief Experimental Analysis as Part of an After-School Reading Program Karissa Danes, Kaitlin O’Shea, Kimberlee.
0 From TN Department of Education Presentation RTII: Response to Instruction and Intervention.
The Wisconsin RtI Center (CFDA #84.027) acknowledges the support of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction in the development of this presentation.
Evaluating Student Response to Instruction Using a 3-Tier RtI Progress Monitoring System John M. Hintze, Ph.D. University of Massachusetts National Center.
Response to Intervention: Improving Achievement for ALL Students Understanding the Response to Intervention Process: A Parent’s Guide Presented by: Dori.
Method Participants and Setting Two second grade students who were identified as below average readers The study was conducted in an elementary school.
Mississippi’s Three Tier Model of Instruction An Overview of the Intervention Policy and Process.
Mississippi’s Three Tier Model of Instruction An Overview of the Intervention Policy and Process.
Adolescent Literacy – Professional Development
Training Interventionists to Implement a Brief Experimental Analysis of Reading Protocol to Elementary Students: An Evaluation of Three Training Packages.
Students At-Risk for Reading Difficulties: High and Low Responders Sharon Vaughn and Greg Roberts Center on Instruction, University of Texas Sylvia Linan-Thompson,
Method Participants and Setting Three second grade students from two different elementary schools in Eau Claire, WI participated in this study. Teachers.
From Screening to Verification: The RTI Process at Westside Jolene Johnson, Ed.S. Monica McKevitt, Ed.S.
Investigating the Consistency of Results Obtained from a Brief Experimental Analysis of Oral Reading Fluency Christine A. Schounard, Maddie J. Sutton,
Response to Intervention (RtI) & The IST Process Jennifer Maichin Patricia Molloy Special Education Teacher Principal IST Chairperson Meadow Drive Elementary.
Reevaluation Using PSM/RTI Processes, PLAFP, and Exit Criteria How do I do all this stuff?
Training Individuals to Implement a Brief Experimental Analysis of Oral Reading Fluency Amber Zank, M.S.E & Michael Axelrod, Ph.D. Human Development Center.
RTI: Response to Intervention An Invitation to Begin… Rutgers Conference January 2015 Janet Higgins Reading Specialist East Amwell Township School Rutgers.
2006 OSEP Project Directors Meeting 1 Screening and Progress Monitoring for Identification of Reading Disabilities within an RTI Model Screening and Progress.
RTI & THE CONNECTION TO PLC’S Essentials for Administrators Sept. 27, 2012.
PLCS & THE CONNECTION TO RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION Essentials for Administrators Sept. 27, 2012.
Effective Behavior & Instructional Support. Implementing RTI through Effective Behavior & Instructional Support.
 Three Criteria: Inadequate classroom achievement (after intervention) Insufficient progress Consideration of exclusionary factors  Sources of Data.
A Look at Repeated Readings. Agenda What is repeated readings? Why is repeated readings effective? What does the supporting research for repeated readings.
 October 29,2009. Define Response to Intervention Provide an overview of EBIS implementation Learn about TTSD’s history, demographics, program and outcomes.
Part 2: Assisting Students Struggling with Reading: Multi-Tier System of Supports H325A
Winter  The RTI.2 framework integrates Common Core State Standards, assessment, early intervention, and accountability for at-risk students in.
RTI 2 Please write down three things you want to know before this session is done today.
+ Response to Intervention Ann Morrison Ph.D.. + Two Parts of Response to Intervention To ensure that all students will meet state and district standards.
Prospective school psychology graduate students must take the GRE. Test takers often prioritize studying for the verbal section (Loken, et al., 2004).
1 3.0 Matching Students to Intervention Support. 2 Examine a process to identify students that may need more support Create a system to efficiently and.
WestEd.org Washington Private Schools RtI Conference Follow- up Webinar October 16, 2012 Silvia DeRuvo Pam McCabe WestEd Center for Prevention and Early.
Reading is a fundamental skill for success in school. Thus, providing effective intervention to children underperforming in a standard classroom is critical.
Response to Intervention for PST Dr. Kenneth P. Oliver Macon County Schools’ Fall Leadership Retreat November 15, 2013.
The Continuum of Interventions in a 3 Tier Model Oakland Schools 3 Tier Literacy Leadership Team Training November
Using BEA to Select Skill and/or Performance Interventions
The Continuum of Interventions in a 3 Tier Model
Elizabeth Levene, The HELPS Program can Provide YOU with the Tools to Help Struggling Readers Welcome Elizabeth Levene,
Using BEA to Modify Packaged Reading Interventions for
Data-Based Instructional Decision Making
Response to Intervention in Educational Transformation Schools
Presentation transcript:

The Effectiveness of Standardized versus Individualized Interventions in Reading Melissa Coolong-Chaffin, PhD, NCSP Michael Axelrod, PhD, LP, NCSP Kaitlin O’Shea, MSE Kimberlee Maczko, MSE Karissa Danes, MSE University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire 1

Disclosures There are no conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, associated with this presentation Our program is currently funded by UWEC

Acknowledgements Statistical analysis- Kelly O’Shea Undergraduate student interventionists School partners, staff, and students

Today’s Agenda Intervention Selection within RtI Academic Intervention Clinic at UWEC Method Great Leaps versus BEA Results Discussion Implications for practice Questions, comments

Problem Solving Within RtI Tier 1 CORE Primary Prevention: Schoolwide and classwide instruction Tier 2 SUPPLEMENTAL Secondary Prevention: Intensified, validated intervention Tier 3 INTENSIVE Tertiary Prevention: Further intensified and individualized Intervention ~80% of students ~15% ~5%

Assessment within a PS Model Focuses on answering questions such as What skills should we teach? How should we teach the skills? As opposed to Does the student meet eligibility criteria? Brief Experimental Analysis allows us to answer the first two questions, however resource intensive

Questions remain How do we select interventions for at risk and high risk students? Is a packaged intervention sufficient, or do at risk students benefit from an individualized approach? Our study explored the following research question: Do students who receive interventions indicated by a BEA make greater gains in oral reading fluency than students who receive an standardized approach?

Academic Intervention Clinic at UWEC History Objectives 1.Provide brief academic interventions to students 2.Train undergraduate students to: Implement evidence-based interventions with fidelity Accurately collect outcome data Currently in 3 schools Funded primary through the university’s undergraduate differential tuition program

Participants Second grade students from two schools in small city in the upper Midwest School One, 82% of students receive FRL School Two, 46% of students receive FRL Referred to an afterschool reading program by their teachers due to ORF performance below benchmark BEA n= 15 GL n= 19

Procedures Students randomly assigned to receive modified Great Leaps or intervention identified through brief experimental analysis Approximately equal numbers in each school Three grade level passages from Formative Assessment System for Children (FAST) were administered to establish baseline Great Leaps placement test or BEA Intervention occurred in 25 minute sessions two times per week for 7 weeks

Procedures Progress was monitored one time per week using grade level FAST passage (WRCM) After 7 weeks of intervention, three passages were administered as a follow up

Great Leaps Standard Treatment Intervention Daily practice of reading skills Phonological awareness Phonics Oral Reading Fluency Includes modeling, multiple opportunities to practice, graphing and incentives for increased performance (Mercer & Campbell, 1998)

Empirical Support for Great Leaps Effective for increasing oral reading fluency Mercer, Cambell, Miller, Mercer, & Lane (2000) Begeny, Schulte, & Johnson (2012)

Great Leaps in Our Study Adapted for the study More repetitions of the activities Filled a 25-minute time period two times per week for seven weeks Three activities each session Phonics High Frequency Word Lists/Phrases Stories

Great Leaps Procedure Student reads probe (phonics, high-frequency words or stories) for one-minute. Standard Error Correction Procedure Correct errors as they are made Review errors at the end of 1-min reading Interventionist computes WRCM and tells student the score Mark it on the graph. Repeat process 3 times each session for each activity Student can earn prize.

Brief Experimental Analysis (BEA) Allows us to “test drive” interventions in order to find one that fits best for an individual student Compare multiple interventions to one another Helps us identify promising interventions to implement over time

General BEA Procedure Student reads alone to establish baseline E.g., CBM-R probe, early reading probe Implement intervention using that probe Administer probe again after the intervention Look at increase over baseline Replication Extended Analysis

Empirical Support for BEA Using BEA to select interventions is an effective approach to identifying successful interventions. Meta-analysis of oral reading fluency - Burns & Wagner (2008) Early Literacy Skills - Pettursdottir et al. (2009) Math - Mong & Mong (2012) Writing – Parker et al. (2012)

BEA in Our Study “Test drive” three different interventions Repeated Reading (RR) Listening Passage Preview (LPP) Incentive Attempt to replicate intervention effects by comparing top two Implement “winner” for 7 weeks WSPA Fall 2013

Repeated Reading with Error Correction Allows us to see if student needs more practice Student reads alone to establish baseline Student practices reading probe 3 times Errors are corrected after each reading Student reads alone for one minute while interventionist records WRCM and errors

Listening Passage Preview Allows us to see if the student needs more modeling at the passage level Student reads passage to establish baseline Interventionist reads passage to provide a model of fluent reading (proper pacing and expression) Student reads alone for one minute while interventionist records WRCM and errors

Incentive Allows us to see if student isn’t motivated Student reads passage to establish baseline Student is told she will earn a prize if she “beats her score” (usually 20% increase) Student reads alone for one minute while interventionist records WRCM and errors Count words read correct and errors, give prize if earned

Quality Indicators Interobserver agreement- above 95% Treatment fidelity- above 95%

Results Descriptive Information Both groups’ scores generally increased over time. The BEA group had higher mean scores at every time point. Independent Samples T-Test Statistically significant difference in overall WRCM growth between groups. BEA group had a higher overall WRCM growth than the GL group. BEA Mean = WRCM Growth GL Mean = 4.26 WRCM Growth Large effect size - Cohen’s d =.83.

WRCM Scores Over Time

Limitations Small sample size Between groups design All of BEA interventions focused on passage reading fluency Great Leaps intervention include fluency practice for words, phrases, passages More research is needed

Implications BEA-indicated interventions may be more effective than a modified version of the Great Leaps intervention Ongoing progress monitoring is always best practice

Implications Training Time intensive May take minutes to complete BEA Makes this appropriate for Tier 3 Importance of demonstrating experimental control in applied settings How many demonstrations of experimental effects are needed?

Questions? Comments?

Contact Information Human Development Center Website: Dr. Coolong-Chaffin Dr. Axelrod

References Begeny, J.C., Schulte, A.C., Johnson, K. (2012). Enhancing instructional problem solving: An efficient system for assisting struggling learners. New York: The Guilford Press. Burns, M.K. & Wagner, D. (2008). Determining an effective intervention within a brief experimental analysis for reading: A meta-analytic review. School Psychology Review, 37 (1), Christ, T. J., Ardoin, S., Monaghen, B., Van Norman, E. & White, M. J. (2013). CBMReading: Technical Manual. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Educational Psychology. Mercer, C. D. & Campbell, K.U. (1998). Great Leaps Reading Kindergarten- Grade 2. Gainsville, FL: Diarmuid. Mercer, C.D., Campbell, K.U., Miller, W.D., Mercer, K.D., & Lane, H.B. (2000). Effects of a reading fluency intervention for middle schoolers with specific learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15 (4),