Effective Teaming Using Data to Guide Actions Sally Helton & Lisa Bates B ehavior and I nstructional S upport E ffective

Objectives Learn about the teams that are involved in EBIS/RTI Understand the difference between 20% and 80% teams Develop awareness of the components that comprise the EBIS process

PBS MONTHLY 20% EBIS MONTHLY 80% EBIS QUARTERLY SCHOOL-WIDE / GLOBAL -Looks for Patterns in Student Behavior -Implements Prevention Throughout School SCHOOL-WIDE / GLOBAL -Looks for Patterns in Student Academic Performance -Implements Prevention In the CORE Throughout School INTERVENTION FOCUS -Places & Monitors Students in Academic, Behavioral, and Attendance Interventions -Problem Solving -Progress Monitoring Intensifying/Exiting/Referring to SPED TEAMING

School-wide EBIS Teams Make Sure the CORE is Healthy (80% Teams”) CORE Programs are healthy when they are evidence-based (e.g., Holt, CPM) and taught to ALL students consistently and with fidelity. We cannot expect what we don’t teach – a strong CORE Program is based on teaching SKILLS to all students. We know we’ve done the above when at least 80% of our students can demonstrate what we’ve taught. If this is not the case, EBIS Teams lead discussions about strengthening CORE Programs – NOT JUST FIXING INDIVIDUAL STUDENTS!! Literacy is the pathway to success: EBIS Teams must focus on reading and behavior, above all else.

Monthly EBIS Teams Discuss Students Not Responding to the Core (“20% Teams”) No more than 20% of the student population should require interventions (hopefully less). Above all else, 20% Teams monitor student progress in interventions. 20% Teams do not engage in story telling, they are solution- focused about teaching academic and behavioral skills 20% Teams make decisions about students’ programs using data and applying decision rules and interventions from the “protocol.” 20% Teams use decision rules to decide when a student may need to be evaluated for a possible specific learning disability.

EBIS vs. SST/Pre-Referral SST/Pre-referral Students are identified as needing support through teacher /parent referral Teachers are asked to “prove” student need & what interventions have been tried Interventions are loosely defined Typically, students do not receive interventions throughout the evaluation process – only if & when they qualify for services A team of “experts” listens to the teacher and decides if the student “should be referred” Interventions provided are typically not research-based (or have a replicable effect for most students) Programmatic support is typically provided only at the end of the evaluation process (again, if & when they qualify for services) EBIS Screen ALL students and use that data to determine who receives interventions Monitor all students’ progress in the general curriculum using appropriate assessments (e.g. CBM, MAZE, grades, OAKS, etc.) Choose and implement scientifically validated interventions to deal with a student's learning problems: Using the district approved Protocols Monitor how the student responds to the intervention by using assessments at consistent intervals Follow formal decision rules based on data regarding which students are not making sufficient progress Procedures exist that ensure the fidelity of intervention delivery Determine the level of support that any student needs (regardless of eligibility) in order to be successful

Donald participates in the general curriculum EBIS Team reviews achievement and behavioral data (school wide) and places Donald in a group intervention Donald isn’t doing well Donald improves Donald improves EBIS Team conducts Individual Problem Solving & a more intensive intervention is selected Resumes general program Donald doesn’t improve Donald doesn’t improve Special Education referral is initiated Donald probably recycles Intervention is intense and LD is suspected Improvement is good and other factors are suspected as cause Evaluation planning meeting, Procedural safeguards provided, consent obtained, 60 school-day timeline starts

Need to shift thinking.... All children can learn Intervene early Multi-tiered model Research-based, scientifically validated instruction/ interventions Screen, diagnose, and monitor Make data informed decisions RtI: Policy Considerations and Implementation, National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005

E BIS: a structured, systematic process  Teaming  School wide planning  Targeted planning  Regular meeting structure  Tiered interventions  Referral for special education evaluation

The EBIS team has three purposes Review school-wide behavior and academic data (80%) Identify students for supplemental instruction and monitor/adjust (20%) Use RTI for Special Education eligibility

Defining “team” Teamwork is an Individual Skill (Avery, 2001) A team is a group of individuals responding successfully to the opportunity presented by shared responsibility.

What about…. Timeliness Confidentiality Participation Honesty Openness Respect Conflicts

Planning for Systems Change Necessary participants Organized data Clear purpose Assigned roles Efficient process Sufficient trust…and accountability

Necessary Participants Staff who: Have relevant information Will implement decisions made Possess authority to follow up

EBIS Core Team membership Principal Classroom Teachers Instructional Coordinator/Reading Specialist School Counselor/Psychologist Learning Specialist ELL Teacher

Organized Data Academic Universal screening and progress monitoring Ready to present – easy to read format

Clear Purpose Common understanding is key Improvement of instruction and increased achievement for all students Not… Pre-referral Griping Pass the buck

Assigned Roles Facilitator Data manager Communicator Recorder

Efficient Process Participants must be prepared Defined agenda Commitment to stay on topic 1 hour or less

Sufficient Trust…and Accountability Commitment to complete assigned tasks Group agreement to accountability Honest communication Conflict Capable Trusting the process Embracing Decision Rules

Something to think about... Individual commitment to a group effort, that is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilization work. -Vince Lombardi

So…we know what makes a good team… now what do the team meetings look like?

Effective Teaming CONTENT/GRADE LEVEL EBIS TEAMS (20%) Plan and implement small group academic interventions MONTHLY Monitors student progress in small group and individual interventions Makes special ed. referrals to RMT based on TTSD decision rules for adequate progress in interventions EBIS LEADERSHIP TEAM (80%) Meets Quarterly Investigates and plans school- wide academic programs EBS LEADERSHIP TEAM Meets Monthly Plans and implements school-wide and small group behavior supports

S chool Wide Planning (80% Meeting) Why: To ensure that 80% of the students are at benchmark. If the core is strong, we will have the resources necessary to provide interventions for those students who are struggling. When: Review school-wide data 3 times a year. Who: Principal, Instructional Coordinator, Teacher, ELL and Special Ed representatives

Is your core program strong enough? Using data to make decisions about the 80%

Data used to determine if the core program is meeting the needs of 80% of the students? Academic data reviewed three times/year: MAZE Scores Disaggregated by Ethnicity Grade Level Program (ELL, SPED, etc.) OAKS data Percent meet/exceed benchmarks Grades Disaggregated by Ethnicity Subject Grade Level Teacher Behavior data reviewed three times/year: Office Discipline Referral trends Who (grade, gender, ethnic group) What Where When Attendance trends

Options to consider if the 80% Criterion is not being met in Reading: 90 minutes of English/Language Arts daily? Protected allocated reading time each day? Core and supplemental programs implemented with fidelity? Additional professional development?

What do we do about the lowest 20% of the students? Targeted Planning

Targeted Meeting (20% Meetings) Why: To place and monitor students in interventions When: Occur monthly for each grade level Who: Principal, Instructional Coordinator, Counselor, Teachers, ELL, Special Ed. Data: OAKS, MAZE, Grades

Reading Identifying the 20% Universal Screening: Every middle school student is tested on OAKS and Maze Students scoring at or below the 35th percentile on OAKS or below the 20 th percentile on Maze are screened further for fluency and comprehension in order to determine the appropriate intervention.

Failing Grades Develop intervention plans for all students: With 2 or more F’s OR GPA of <1.4

Now that we’ve identified the students needing interventions, we need to meet about them!

Regular Meeting Structure to Plan for the 20%. Complete EBIS Group Intervention & Planning Form Place students in group interventions based on screening results Plan progress monitoring (using prescribed guidelines)

EBIS Packet Page 6

Tiered Interventions How do we know what interventions students should receive? Universal All Students

EBIS Packet Page 7

Screening Decision Rules Every student at each grade level who scores in the lowest 20 percent on MAZE, or at or below the 35 th percentile on the OAKS, is: further screened with oral reading fluency measures from 6- Minute Solution (check for fluency & accuracy); then, the San Diego Quick is administered to evaluate what level of the SRAI to use; then, the SRAI is administered to gauge comprehension skills; then, for students with the most comprehensive reading needs, the Language! placement tests are administered.

EBIS Packet Page 11

EBIS Packet Page 12

EBIS Packet Page 14

We use data to ensure the intervention is working!

Progress Monitoring On a regular basis, (two times per month with MAZE) data are collected and analyzed to determine whether the intervention is effective. If the intervention is not effective, there is clear criteria for when and how changes must be made.

Progress Monitoring: Meet Monthly to consider… 1. Exiting (Intervention no longer needed) 2. Continuing (Student is making progress, but, continues to need support) 3. Intensifying (Intervention is not working and should be revised), or 4. Referring for Special Education Evaluation (Intensive intervention is proving unsuccessful

Exit from Soar when: Maze scores indicate 3 or more data points above the aimline AND are at or above the 50 th percentile; AND Grade+ scores are at or above the 5 th stanine; AND OAKS scores are at or above the 35 th percentile

Intensify reading interventions when: Progress monitoring indicates 3 or 4 data points below the aimline (maze). Slope is flat or decreasing AND scores are below 50 th percentile (maze). Grade+ scores at or below 3 rd stanine.

After one semester of the most intensive intervention (e.g., Language! – with good attendance), progress continues below aimline on Maze, and Grade+ scores are at or below the 3 rd stanine. Use the already completed Problem Solving Worksheet to consider the whole child and possible barriers to success. Refer for Special Education evaluation if:

High above the hushed crowd, Rex tried to remain focused. Still, he couldn’t shake one nagging thought: He was an old dog and this was a new trick.