July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development1 Response to Instruction Part II Linking the Data to Instruction

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development2 Agenda Review of acronyms Progress monitoring Response to instruction

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development3 RTI Resources Hardcastle, B. & Justice, K. (2006). RTI and the Classroom Teacher, LRP Publications

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development4 Protocol Purpose to have respectful, in-depth, insightful conversation about teaching and learning Listen while others are speaking Be respectful of others comments and/or suggestions Be cognizant of time if there is established limit

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development5 Alphabet Soup – Alaska Acronyms ACFA – Alaska Computerized Formative Assessment AYP – adequate yearly progress CBM – curriculum based measures ELL – English language learner ELP – English language proficiency GLE – Grade Level Expectations HSGQE – High School Graduation Qualifying Exam LEP – limited English proficient NCLB – No Child Left Behind PM – progress monitoring PSGLE – Performance Standards/Grade Level Expectations RTI – Response to Instruction (in Alaska) or Response to Intervention SBA – Standards Based Assessment SM – strategic monitoring

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development6 Linking the Data Determine which programs are getting results Get to the root causes of problems Guide curriculum development and revision Promote accountability Meet federal and state requirements Better understand the school Continuously improve the system Bernhardt, V. (1998), Data Analysis for Continuous School Improvement

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development7 Progress Monitoring Scientifically based practice used to assess students academic performance Evaluates the effectiveness of instruction Students level of performance is determined and goals identified Students academic performance measured on regular basis (weekly or monthly) Progress toward goal measured Teaching adjusted as needed based on the measurements National Center on Student Progress Monitoring, 2007

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development8 Response to Instruction Response to Instruction addresses the needs of ALL to meet the needs of EACH. J. Knutson, 2007

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development9 Response to Instruction Multi-tiered Problem solving approach Effective instruction Formative assessments Effective instructional interventions based on data from assessments Increasing levels of intensity based on need of all Most struggling Outperforming Progress monitoring All decisions based on data

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development10 Response to Instruction Tier I – Core – 80% Students will be able to access the standards with instruction provided with the core curriculum Tier II – Strategic – 15% Students will need targeted instructional interventions in order to access the standards Tier III – Intensive – 5% Students will need intensive instructional interventions in order to access the standards

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development11 Response to Instruction – Change Way of Thinking Change our way of thinking From deficit model to at-risk model Old thinking – view students as having deficit, some children will fail to learn New thinking – view students as at risk, all kids will learn to basic proficiency level

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development12 Old Thinking - Deficit Model Assumption: In every distribution of kids, some of them have specific deficits and therefore will fail to learn. Level below which we infer possible deficits Achievement Low High Dave Tilly, Alaska EED Winter Conference, 2007 Historical Practice: The job of the assessor is to assess students to identify their deficits so we can provide services. We use the best tools available, matched to students presumed deficits. We use these data to help identify what and how to teach.

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development13 New Thinking - RTI Model Assumption: All kids will learn basic skills to a basic level of proficiency. Some kids are at risk of not learning them. Practice: The job of the assessor is to to identify students who are at risk of not learning basic skills to a minimum standard of proficiency. Also, the assessor identifies patterns of performance on instructionally relevant subskills. We use these data to figure what And how to teach these students. Dave Tilly, Alaska EED Winter Conference, 2007 Minimum Proficiency Achievement Low High

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development14 5% 15% Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Based on assessment data High Intensity Of longer duration Strategic Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response 80 % Universal Instruction All students Preventive, proactive Response to Instruction: A School-Wide System for Student Success Tier III - Intensive Tier II - Strategic Tier I - Core

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development15 Big Ideas to Ensure Effective Response to Instruction Use evidence-based practice to extent available Match instruction to individual student needs Ensure the instruction is sufficiently explicit and sufficiently intense Monitor fidelity of implementation Monitor student response and change instruction as necessary Dave Tilly, Alaska EED Winter Conference, 2007

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development16 Response to Instruction - Tier I Tier I Core curriculum Effective instruction Universal screening Early instructional intervention Effective for most students – approx. 80% of students

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development17 Tier II Supplements core curriculum Instructional interventions supported by data Individual/small group instruction Progress monitoring Response to Instruction – Tier II

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development18 Tier III Small percentage of student population More intensive instructional interventions Find successful instructional interventions Useful prior to special education referral Response to Instruction – Tier III

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development19 Response to Instruction (RTI) Lab Utilizing the previous brainstormed list of assessments, place them into the three tiers according to their use Utilizing the list of instructional materials, place them into the three tiers according to their use How did you determine the placement in each tier? What did you discover about the instructional materials and assessments utilized in your district and schools?

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development20 RTI Lab #2 Utilizing your SBA and/or AIMSweb data, place the percentages of students that with this data alone fall into a tier. Complete this information for one subject area at the school or district level Compare the instructional materials triangle, assessment triangle and the data triangle What do you notice? What AHA can you share with the group?

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development21 School Reading Program Sample 3 rd Grade LMB, Slingerland Seeing Stars, Rewards, SRA High Performance Writing, Primary Phonics, Direct Instruction 45 minutes daily, per group Read Naturally, Peer Tutors, Parent Volunteer Tutors At Home Support, Flexible Grouping 15 minutes daily, per group Harcourt, Differentiated Instruction, Trade Books, Content Texts; Strategies – Literature circles, Content reading, Shared reading, Guided reading, SSR, Think alouds 90 minutes daily

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development22 School Reading Program Sample - 3rd Grade

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development23 Lab Using the Sample Grade 3 School Reading Program as a guide Select a curricular area: reading, writing or math Begin to map out what your school or district uses at present and if there are gaps and identify what you might need to fill the gaps

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development24 RTI School Wide Model What it is Represents a way of using data to examine the system in relation to the most important results Structuring thinking so that we dont miss anything Identifying strategies with a high probability of improving student performance and knowing if they work Keeping our attention focused on the most important things Common sense into practice (cf. Fullan) What it is not A panacea A curriculum, an intervention, one theoretical orientation One size fits all Hoops to jump through Easier than what came before Dave Tilly, Alaska EED Winter Conference, 2007

July 2007Alaska Department of Education and Early Development25 Response to Instruction Tier I – Core Tier II – Strategic Tier III – Intensive