Response to Intervention RTI: What Are Your Questions? At your tables: Discuss the key questions that you still have about the RTI model. Write down the TOP 1-2 questions that you would like to have answered (or discussed) at today’s workshop. 1

Response to Intervention Summer RTI Training Dates Aug 15-18,

Response to Intervention RTI for Elementary, Middle, & High Schools: Introduction for Cohort 3 Jim Wright

Response to Intervention Workshop Goals… Essential Elements of RTI Model NYS RTI Expectations Planning Time: First Steps to Prepare for RTI Rollout Information Regarding RCSD District Implementation of RTI

Response to Intervention Key RTI Challenges 1.Promoting Staff Understanding & Support for RTI 2.Verifying that Strong ‘Core Instruction’ and Interventions Are Being Delivered in Classrooms 3.Using Screening Data to Identify Students at Risk for Academic or Behavioral Problems 4.Establishing a Strong RTI Team for Students Who Need a Problem-Solving Approach 5.Developing & Implementing Effective Tier 2/3 Intervention Programs 6.Ensuring That Interventions Are Carried Out With Fidelity

Response to Intervention 6 “The quality of a school as a learning community can be measured by how effectively it addresses the needs of struggling students.” --Wright (2005) Source: Wright, J. (2005, Summer). Five interventions that work. NAESP Leadership Compass, 2(4) pp.1,6.

Response to Intervention 7 School Instructional Time: The Irreplaceable Resource “In the average school system, there are 330 minutes in the instructional day, 1,650 minutes in the instructional week, and 56,700 minutes in the instructional year. Except in unusual circumstances, these are the only minutes we have to provide effective services for students. The number of years we have to apply these minutes is fixed. Therefore, each minute counts and schools cannot afford to support inefficient models of service delivery.” p. 177 Source: Batsche, G. M., Castillo, J. M., Dixon, D. N., & Forde, S. (2008). Best practices in problem analysis. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp ).

Response to Intervention 8 RTI Assumption: Struggling Students Are ‘Typical’ Until Proven Otherwise… RTI logic assumes that: –A student who begins to struggle in general education is typical, and that –It is general education’s responsibility to find the instructional strategies that will unlock the student’s learning potential Only when the student shows through well-documented interventions that he or she has ‘failed to respond to intervention’ does RTI begin to investigate the possibility that the student may have a learning disability or other special education condition.

Response to Intervention 9 Essential Elements of RTI (Fairbanks, Sugai, Guardino, & Lathrop, 2007) 1.A “continuum of evidence-based services available to all students" that range from universal to highly individualized & intensive 2.“Decision points to determine if students are performing significantly below the level of their peers in academic and social behavior domains" 3.“Ongoing monitoring of student progress" 4.“Employment of more intensive or different interventions when students do not improve in response" to lesser interventions 5.“Evaluation for special education services if students do not respond to intervention instruction" Source: Fairbanks, S., Sugai, G., Guardino, S., & Lathrop, M. (2007). Response to intervention: Examining classroom behavior support in second grade. Exceptional Children, 73, p. 289.

Response to Intervention NYSED RTI Guidance Memo: April 2008

Response to Intervention 11

Response to Intervention 12 “The Regents policy framework for RtI: Defines RtI to minimally include: Appropriate instruction delivered to all students in the general education class by qualified personnel. Appropriate instruction in reading means scientific research-based reading programs that include explicit and systematic instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary development, reading fluency (including oral reading skills) and reading comprehension strategies. Screenings applied to all students in the class to identify those students who are not making academic progress at expected rates.”

Response to Intervention 13 “ Instruction matched to student need with increasingly intensive levels of targeted intervention and instruction for students who do not make satisfactory progress in their levels of performance and/or in their rate of learning to meet age or grade level standards. Repeated assessments of student achievement which should include curriculum based measures to determine if interventions are resulting in student progress toward age or grade level standards. The application of information about the student’s response to intervention to make educational decisions about changes in goals, instruction and/or services and the decision to make a referral for special education programs and/or services.”

Response to Intervention 14 “ Written notification to the parents when the student requires an intervention beyond that provided to all students in the general education classroom that provides information about the: -amount and nature of student performance data that will be collected and the general education services that will be provided; -strategies for increasing the student’s rate of learning; and -parents’ right to request an evaluation for special education programs and/or services.”

Response to Intervention 15 What previous approach to diagnosing Learning Disabilities does RTI replace? Prior to RTI, many states used a ‘Test-Score Discrepancy Model’ to identify Learning Disabilities. A student with significant academic delays would be administered an battery of tests, including an intelligence test and academic achievement test(s). If the student was found to have a substantial gap between a higher IQ score and lower achievement scores, a formula was used to determine if that gap was statistically significant and ‘severe’. If the student had a ‘severe discrepancy’ [gap] between IQ and achievement, he or she would be diagnosed with a Learning Disability.

Response to Intervention 16 Target Student Discrepancy 1: Skill Gap (Current Performance Level) Avg Classroom Academic Performance Level ‘Dual-Discrepancy’: RTI Model of Learning Disability (Fuchs 2003) Discrepancy 2: Gap in Rate of Learning (‘Slope of Improvement’)

Response to Intervention 17 Secondary Students: Unique Challenges… Struggling learners in middle and high school may: Have significant deficits in basic academic skills Lack higher-level problem-solving strategies and concepts Present with issues of school motivation Show social/emotional concerns that interfere with academics Have difficulty with attendance Are often in a process of disengaging from learning even as adults in school expect that those students will move toward being ‘self-managing’ learners…

Response to Intervention 18 School Dropout as a Process, Not an Event “It is increasingly accepted that dropout is best conceptualized as a long-term process, not an instantaneous event; however, most interventions are administered at a middle or high school level after problems are severe.” Source: Jimerson, S., Reschly, A.L., & Hess, R. (2008). Best practices in increasing the likelihood of school completion. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds). Best Practices in School Psychology - 5th Ed (pp ). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.. p.1090

Response to Intervention 19 RTI ‘Pyramid of Interventions’ Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1: Universal interventions. Available to all students in a classroom or school. Can consist of whole-group or individual strategies or supports. Tier 2 Individualized interventions. Subset of students receive interventions targeting specific needs. Tier 3: Intensive interventions. Students who are ‘non- responders’ to Tiers 1 & 2 are referred to the RTI Team for more intensive interventions.

Response to Intervention 20 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p. 12

Response to Intervention 21 Tier 1 Core Instruction Tier I core instruction: Is universal—available to all students. Can be delivered within classrooms or throughout the school. Is an ongoing process of developing strong classroom instructional practices to reach the largest number of struggling learners. All children have access to Tier 1 instruction/interventions. Teachers have the capability to use those strategies without requiring outside assistance. Tier 1 instruction encompasses: The school’s core curriculum. All published or teacher-made materials used to deliver that curriculum. Teacher use of ‘whole-group’ teaching & management strategies. Tier I instruction addresses this question: Are strong classroom instructional strategies sufficient to help the student to achieve academic success?

Response to Intervention 22 Tier I (Classroom) Intervention Tier 1 intervention: Targets ‘red flag’ students who are not successful with core instruction alone. Uses ‘evidence-based’ strategies to address student academic or behavioral concerns. Must be feasible to implement given the resources available in the classroom. Tier I intervention addresses the question: Does the student make adequate progress when the instructor uses specific academic or behavioral strategies matched to the presenting concern?

Response to Intervention Tier 1: Grade-Level Team or Consultant Who consults on the student case?: Choice A: The teacher brings the student to a grade-level meeting to develop an intervention plan, check up on the plan in 4-8 weeks. Choice B: The teacher sits down with a consultant (selected from a roster or assigned to the classroom or grade level). Together, consultant and teacher develop an intervention, check up on the plan in 4-8 weeks. 23

Response to Intervention Tier 1: Grade-Level Team or Consultant What is the next step if the student is a non- responder?: The student case is referred to the school or grade-level Tier 2 Data Team. The Team places the student into appropriate Tier 2 services if available—or may decide to refer directly to the Problem-Solving Team. 24

Response to Intervention 25 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p. 13

Response to Intervention 26 Tier 2: Supplemental (Group-Based) Interventions (Standard Treatment Protocol) Tier 2 interventions are typically delivered in small-group format. About 15% of students in the typical school will require Tier 2/supplemental intervention support. Group size for Tier 2 interventions is limited to 3-5 students. Students placed in Tier 2 interventions should have a shared profile of intervention need. Programs or practices used in Tier 2 interventions should be ‘evidence-based’. The progress of students in Tier 2 interventions are monitored at least 2 times per month. Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools. Routledge: New York.

Response to Intervention Tier 2: Data Team Who makes up the Data Team and what is its purpose?: The Data Team is a school-wide or grade-specific team that typically includes classroom teachers, a school administrator, and perhaps other participants. The Data Team reviews school-wide screening data (e.g., DIBELS NEXT, AimsWeb) three times per year to determine which students are at risk and require supplemental (Tier 2) intervention. The Team continues to meet (e.g., monthly) to review student progress and to move students out of, into or across Tier 2 groups depending on progress and classroom performance. 27

Response to Intervention Tier 2: Data Team Who makes up the Data Team and what is its purpose? (Cont): The Data Team can also take Tier 1 (classroom) referrals for struggling students who were not picked up in the academic screening(s) but are showing serious academic difficulties. 28

Response to Intervention 29 Scheduling Elementary Tier 2 Interventions Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices. New York: Routledge. Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade K Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 1 Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 2 Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 3 Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 4 Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 5 Anyplace Elementary School: RTI Daily Schedule Option 3: ‘Floating RTI’:Gradewide Shared Schedule. Each grade has a scheduled RTI time across classrooms. No two grades share the same RTI time. Advantages are that outside providers can move from grade to grade providing push-in or pull-out services and that students can be grouped by need across different teachers within the grade. 9:00-9:30 9:45-10:15 10:30-11:00 12:30-1:00 1:15-1:45 2:00-2:30

Response to Intervention Tier 2: Data Team What is the next step if the student is a non- responder?: The Data Team refers the student to the Tier 3 RTI Problem- Solving Team if the student fails to make acceptable progress during at least one intervention trial. 30

Response to Intervention 31 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p. 14

Response to Intervention 32 Tier 3: Intensive Individualized Interventions (Problem-Solving Protocol) Tier 3 interventions are the most intensive offered in a school setting. Students qualify for Tier 3 interventions because: –they are found to have a large skill gap when compared to their class or grade peers; and/or –They did not respond to interventions provided previously at Tiers 1 & 2. Tier 3 interventions are provided daily for sessions of 30 minutes or more. The student-teacher ratio is flexible but should allow the student to receive intensive, individualized instruction. The reading progress of students in Tier 3 interventions is monitored at least weekly. Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools. Routledge: New York.

Response to Intervention Tier 3: RTI Problem-Solving Team How does a referral come in to the Problem- Solving Team?: Referral route A: The Tier 2 Data Team meets periodically to review student progress. If a student is found not to be making expected progress, he or she can then be referred on to the RTI Team. Referral route B: If the school lacks a ‘standard treatment’ Tier 2 intervention for a student concern (e.g., behavior, math), the student may be referred directly to the Problem-Solving Team via a classroom teacher referral. 33

Response to Intervention Tier 3: RTI Problem-Solving Team Who consults on the student case?: The RTI Problem-Solving Team is a multi- disciplinary team that consults with the teacher at the RTI Team Meeting. The school may also want to have other staff (e.g., school nurse, math title teacher) available to attend RTI Team meetings on an as-needed basis for specific student cases. 34

Response to Intervention Tier 3: RTI Problem-Solving Team What is the next step if the student is a non- responder?: The school district should adopt uniform ‘decision rules’ that indicate when a student should be referred on to the Special Education Eligibility Team. Example: A district decided that – across Tiers 2 and 3—a student should go through at least 3 separate interventions of 6-8 instructional weeks each before that student could be designated a ‘non-responder’ and referred to Special Education. 35

Response to Intervention 36 Team Activity: Rate Your Elementary or Secondary School’s ‘RTI Readiness’ In your elbow groups: Review the elementary or secondary version of RTI implementation survey. Rate your school on this survey. Discuss with your group how ‘RTI ready’ your school is at the present time.

Response to Intervention Challenge # 1: Promoting Staff Understanding & Support for RTI Jim Wright

Response to Intervention 38 “ ” “The tipping point is the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point.” (Gladwell, 2000; p. 12) Sources: Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. Little, Brown and Company: NY. Tipping point (sociology). (2010, February 17). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 02:52, March 1, 2010, from “ ” Tipping point: “any process in which, beyond a certain point, the rate at which the process increases dramatically.” (Tipping Point, 2010).

Response to Intervention 39 Q: What Conditions Support the Successful Implementation of RTI? : Continuing professional development to give teachers the skills to implement RTI and educate new staff because of personnel turnover. Administrators who assert leadership under RTI, including setting staff expectations for RTI implementation, finding the needed resources, and monitor ingthe fidelity of implementation. Proactive hiring of teachers who support the principles of RTI and have the skills to put RTI into practice in the classroom. The changing of job roles of teachers and support staff (school psychologists, reading specialists, special educators, etc.) to support the RTI model. Input from teachers and support staff (‘bottom-up’) about how to make RTI work in the school or district, as well as guidance from administration (‘top-down’). Source: Fuchs, D., & Deshler, D. D. (2007). What we need to know about responsiveness to intervention (and shouldn’t be afraid to ask).. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22(2), 129–136.

Response to Intervention Engaging the Reluctant Teacher: 7 Reasons Why Instructors May Resist Implementing Classroom RTI Interventions

Response to Intervention 41 Engaging the Reluctant Teacher: 7 Reasons Why Instructors May Resist Implementing Classroom RTI Interventions Lack of Skills. Teachers lack the skills necessary to successfully implement academic or behavioral interventions in their content-area classrooms (Fisher, 2007; Kamil et al., 2008). Not My Job. Teachers define their job as providing content-area instruction. They do not believe that providing classwide or individual academic and behavioral interventions falls within their job description (Kamil et al., 2008).

Response to Intervention 42 Engaging the Reluctant Teacher: 7 Reasons Why Instructors May Resist Implementing Classroom RTI Interventions (Cont.) No Time. Teachers do not believe that they have sufficient time available in classroom instruction to implement academic or behavioral interventions (Kamil et al., 2008; Walker, 2004). No Payoff. Teachers lack confidence that there will be an adequate instructional pay-off if they put classwide or individual academic or behavioral interventions into place in their content-area classroom (Kamil et al., 2008).

Response to Intervention 43 Engaging the Reluctant Teacher: 7 Reasons Why Instructors May Resist Implementing Classroom RTI Interventions (Cont.) Loss of Classroom Control. Teachers worry that if they depart from their standard instructional practices to adopt new classwide or individual academic or behavior intervention strategies, they may lose behavioral control of the classroom (Kamil et al., 2008). ‘Undeserving Students’. Teachers are unwilling to invest the required effort to provide academic or behavioral interventions for unmotivated students (Walker, 2004) because they would rather put that time into providing additional attention to well-behaved, motivated students who are ‘more deserving’.

Response to Intervention 44 Engaging the Reluctant Teacher: 7 Reasons Why Instructors May Resist Implementing Classroom RTI Interventions (Cont.) The Magic of Special Education. Content-area teachers regard special education services as ‘magic’ (Martens, 1993). According to this view, interventions provided to struggling students in the general-education classroom alone will be inadequate, and only special education services have the power to truly benefit those students.

Response to Intervention 45 Engaging the Reluctant Teacher: Seven Reasons Why Instructors May Resist Implementing Classroom RTI Literacy Interventions 1.Lack of Skills. Teachers lack the skills necessary to successfully implement academic or behavioral interventions in their content-area classrooms. 2.Not My Job. Teachers define their job as providing content-area instruction. They do not believe that providing classwide or individual academic and behavioral interventions falls within their job description. 3.No Time. Teachers do not believe that they have sufficient time available in classroom instruction to implement academic or behavioral interventions. 4.Insufficient Payoff. Teachers lack confidence that there will be an adequate instructional pay-off if they put classwide or individual academic or behavioral interventions into place in their content-area classroom. 5.Loss of Classroom Control. Teachers worry that if they depart from their standard instructional practices to adopt new classwide or individual academic or behavior intervention strategies, they may lose behavioral control of the classroom. 6.‘Undeserving Students’. Teachers are unwilling to invest the required effort to provide academic or behavioral interventions for unmotivated students because they would rather put that time into providing additional attention to well-behaved, motivated students who are ‘more deserving’. 7.The Magic of Special Education. Content-area teachers regard special education services as ‘magic’. According to this view, interventions provided to struggling students in the general-education classroom alone will be inadequate, and only special education services have the power to truly benefit those students.

Response to Intervention RTI Challenge: Promoting Staff Understanding & Support for RTI Review the proactive steps listed here for promoting staff understanding and support for RTI. Discuss how you can accomplish these steps in preparation for the Cohort 3 summer training. 46 Provide staff with an introductory overview of RTI before the end of the current school year. Inventory all opportunities for staff development in your school for the school year (e.g., faculty meetings, PD days, grade-level meetings, etc.). Draft a training calendar for when you can provide ongoing training to teachers in RTI. Bring calendar to summer training.

Response to Intervention Challenge # 2: Verifying that Strong ‘Core Instruction’ and Interventions Are Being Delivered in Classrooms Jim Wright

Response to Intervention 48 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p. 12

Response to Intervention Shared Roles: Interventionist The interventionist is a teacher or other educator who is directly responsible for implementing an intervention for an individual student or small group. The role requires clear definition of the student problem(s), selection of evidence-based intervention strategies or programs, use of data to determine if the intervention is effective, and measurement of how the intervention is carried out to ensure that it is implemented with integrity. 49

Response to Intervention Interventionist: Key ‘Look-Fors’ 1.Defines the student academic or behavioral concern in clear, specific, measurable terms. 2.Selects interventions that are ‘evidence-based’ (i.e., intervention practices or programs that have been demonstrated to be effective in one or more high-quality studies in reputable peer reviewed journals). 3.Selects interventions that logically match the presenting student problem(s) (e.g., choosing a fluency-building intervention such as Paired Reading for a student who has acquired basic reading skills but has delayed reading fluency). 50

Response to Intervention Interventionist: Key ‘Look-Fors’ 4.Delivers the intervention with a high level of integrity (e.g., ensuring that the intervention is implemented with the appropriate frequency, session length, steps of the intervention, student-teacher group size, etc.). 5.Ensures that any accommodations included as part of a general-education student’s RTI intervention plan (e.g., preferential seating, breaking a longer assignment into smaller chunks) do not substantially lower the academic standards against which the student is to be evaluated and are not likely to reduce the student’s rate of learning. 6.Knows which elements of the intervention are ‘critical’ (must be implemented precisely as designed) and those that are ‘negotiable’ (the interventionist has some degree of flexibility in how those elements are implemented). 51

Response to Intervention Interventionist: Key ‘Look-Fors’ 7.Completes required documentation of the intervention (e.g., writing down all necessary details of the intervention plan before implementing, maintaining a contact log to record each intervention session, etc.). 8.Collects baseline data on student performance prior to the intervention, sets a predicted goal for student improvement to be attained by the intervention checkup date, and allots an adequate minimum period for the intervention (e.g., 4-8 instructional weeks) to adequately judge its impact. 9.Collects regular progress-monitoring data during the intervention to determine if the student is making adequate progress (Tier 1 monitoring frequency is at discretion of the interventionist; Tier 2 monitoring occurs at least 1-2 times per month; Tier 3 monitoring occurs at least weekly). 10.Applies decision rules at the checkup date to evaluate whether the intervention is successful and to determine the appropriate ‘next intervention steps’. 52

Response to Intervention 53

Response to Intervention RTI Challenge: Verifying that Strong ‘Core Instruction’ and Interventions Are Being Delivered in Classrooms Review the proactive steps listed here for core instruction and intervention. Discuss how you can accomplish these steps in preparation for the Cohort 3 summer training. 54 Become knowledgeable about intervention resources available on the Internet and within your district. Identify people who could serve as formal or informal ‘intervention coaches’ in your school.

Response to Intervention Challenge # 3: Using Screening Data to Identify Students at Risk for Academic or Behavioral Problems Jim Wright

Response to Intervention 56 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p. 8 …

Response to Intervention 57 RTI Literacy: Assessment & Progress-Monitoring To measure student ‘response to instruction/intervention’ effectively, the RTI model measures students’ academic performance and progress on schedules matched to each student’s risk profile and intervention Tier membership. Benchmarking/Universal Screening. All children in a grade level are assessed at least 3 times per year on a common collection of academic assessments. Strategic Monitoring. Students placed in Tier 2 (supplemental) reading groups are assessed 2 times per month to gauge their progress with this intervention. Intensive Monitoring. Students who participate in an intensive, individualized Tier 3 intervention are assessed at least once per week. Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices. New York: Routledge.

Response to Intervention 58 Educational Decisions and Corresponding Types of Assessment SCREENING/BENCHMARKING DECISIONS: Tier 1: Brief screenings to quickly indicate whether students in the general-education population are academically proficient or at risk. PROGRESS-MONITORING DECISIONS: At Tiers and 3, ongoing ‘formative’ assessments to judge whether students on intervention are making adequate progress. INSTRUCTIONAL/DIAGNOSTIC DECISIONS: At any Tier, detailed assessment to map out specific academic deficits, discover the root cause(s) of a student’s academic problem. OUTCOME DECISIONS: Summative assessment (e.g., state tests) to evaluate the effectiveness of a program. Source: Hosp, M. K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2007). The ABCs of CBM: A practical guide to curriculum-based measurement. New York: Guilford Press.

Response to Intervention Creating a School-Wide Screening Plan: Recommendations for ALL Schools 1.Ensure that any discussion about grade- or school- or district-wide adoption of RTI screening tools includes general education and special education input. 2.When adopting a screening tool, inventory all formal assessments administered in your school. Discuss whether any EXISTING assessments can be made optional or dropped whenever new screening tools are being added. 3.If possible, use screening tools found by the National Center on RTI to have ‘technical adequacy’. 59

Response to Intervention RTI Challenge: Adopting Schoolwide Screening Measures Review the proactive steps listed here for core instruction and intervention. Discuss how you can accomplish these steps in preparation for the Cohort 3 summer training. 60 Select days in fall, winter, spring of the school year when school- wide screenings will take place. Identify members of a school team to assist in collecting screening information. Select screening tools to assess literacy (and perhaps other areas) in your school. (Remember that existing data—grades, attendance, behavior— can be analyzed periodically and used to ‘screen’ students at risk.)

Response to Intervention Challenge # 4: Establishing a Strong RTI Team for Students Who Need a Problem- Solving Approach Jim Wright

Response to Intervention 62 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p25

Response to Intervention Step 1: Assess Teacher Concerns 5 Mins Step 2: Inventory Student Strengths/Talents 5 Mins Step 3: Review Background/Baseline Data 5 Mins Step 4: Select Target Teacher Concerns 5-10 Mins Step 5: Set Academic and/or Behavioral Outcome Goals and Methods for Progress-Monitoring 5 Mins Step 6: Design an Intervention Plan Mins Step 7: Plan How to Share Meeting Information with the Student’s Parent(s) 5 Mins Step 8: Review Intervention & Monitoring Plans 5 Mins RTI Team Consultative Process

Response to Intervention 64 RTI Team Roles Coordinator Facilitator Recorder Time Keeper Case Manager

Response to Intervention RTI Challenge: Establishing a Strong RTI Team for Students Who Need a Problem-Solving Approach Review the proactive steps listed here for establishing a strong RTI Problem-Solving Team. Discuss how you can accomplish these steps in preparation for the Cohort 3 summer training. 65 Review existing teams in your school and identify teams that can be merged or eliminated to make better use of your problem-solving resources. Schedule sufficient time each week to hold Tier 3 RTI Team meetings for high-stakes students. Identify people who should serve on the RTI Problem-Solving Team (as ‘core’ members or as consultants-as- needed).

Response to Intervention Challenge # 5: Developing & Implementing Effective Tier 2/3 Intervention Programs Jim Wright

Response to Intervention 67 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p. 13

Response to Intervention 68 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p. 14

Response to Intervention 69 Scheduling Elementary Tier 2 Interventions Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices. New York: Routledge. Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade K Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 1 Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 2 Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 3 Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 4 Classroom 1Classroom 2Classroom 3 Grade 5 Anyplace Elementary School: RTI Daily Schedule Option 3: ‘Floating RTI’:Gradewide Shared Schedule. Each grade has a scheduled RTI time across classrooms. No two grades share the same RTI time. Advantages are that outside providers can move from grade to grade providing push-in or pull-out services and that students can be grouped by need across different teachers within the grade. 9:00-9:30 9:45-10:15 10:30-11:00 12:30-1:00 1:15-1:45 2:00-2:30

Response to Intervention Challenge # 6: Ensuring That Interventions Are Carried Out With Fidelity Jim Wright

Response to Intervention 71 Source: New York State Education Department. (October 2010). Response to Intervention: Guidance for New York State School Districts. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from p 42 …

Response to Intervention Assessing Intervention Integrity

Response to Intervention 73 Why Assess Intervention Integrity? When a struggling student fails to respond adequately to a series of evidence-based interventions, that student is likely to face significant and potentially negative consequences, such as failing grades, long-term suspension from school, or even placement in special education. It is crucial, then, that the school monitor the integrity with which educators implement each intervention plan so that it can confidently rule out poor or limited intervention implementation of the intervention as a possible explanation for any student’s ‘non-response’.

Response to Intervention 74 Intervention Integrity Check: Direct Observation Intervention integrity is best assessed through direct observation (Roach & Elliott, 2008). –The key steps of the intervention are defined and formatted as an observational checklist. –An observer watches as the intervention is conducted and checks off on the checklist those steps that were correctly carried out. The observer then computes the percentage of steps correctly carried out.

Response to Intervention 75 Limitations of Direct Observation as an Intervention Integrity Check Direct observations are time-consuming to conduct. Teachers who serve as interventionists may at least initially regard observations of their intervention implementation as evaluations of their job performance, rather than as a child-focused RTI “quality check”. An intervention-implementation checklist typically does not distinguish between--or differentially weight--those intervention steps that are more important from those that are less so. If two teachers implement the same 10- step intervention plan, for example, with one instructor omitting a critical step and the other omitting a fairly trivial step, both can still attain the same implementation score of steps correctly completed. Source: Gansle, K. A., & Noell, G. H. (2007). The fundamental role of intervention implementation in assessing response to intervention. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp ).

Response to Intervention Intervention Script Builder ‘Yes/No’ Step- by-Step Intervention Check Each Step Marked ‘Negotiable or ‘Non- Negotiable’

Response to Intervention 77 Supplemental Methods to Collect Data About Intervention Integrity Teacher Self-Ratings: As a form of self-monitoring, directing interventionists to rate the integrity of their own interventions may prompt higher rates of compliance (e.g., Kazdin, 1989). However, because teacher self- ratings tend to be ‘upwardly biased (Gansle & Noell, 2007, p. 247), they should not be relied upon as the sole rating of intervention integrity. One suggestion for collecting regular teacher reports on intervention implementation in a convenient manner is to use Daily Behavior Reports (DBRs; Chafouleas, Riley-Tillman,, & Sugai, 2007). Sources: Chafouleas, S., Riley-Tillman, T.C., & Sugai, G. (2007). School-based behavioral assessment: Informing intervention and instruction. New York: Guilford Press. Gansle, K. A., & Noell, G. H. (2007). The fundamental role of intervention implementation in assessing response to intervention. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp ). Kazdin, A. E. (1989). Behavior modification in applied settings (4th ed.). Pacific Gove, CA: Brooks/Cole..

Response to Intervention 78 Intervention Contact Log Teacher Intervention Integrity Self-Rating

Response to Intervention 79 Supplemental Methods to Collect Data About Intervention Integrity Intervention Permanent Products: If an intervention plan naturally yields permanent products (e.g., completed scoring sheets, lists of spelling words mastered, behavioral sticker charts), these products can be periodically collected and evaluated as another indicator of intervention integrity (Gansle & Noell, 2007). Source: Gansle, K. A., & Noell, G. H. (2007). The fundamental role of intervention implementation in assessing response to intervention. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp ).

Response to Intervention 80 Intervention Integrity: Verify Through a Mix of Information Sources Schools should consider monitoring intervention integrity through a mix of direct and indirect means, including direct observation and permanent products (Gansle & Noell, 2007), as well as interventionist self-ratings (Roach & Elliott, 2008). Source: Gansle, K. A., & Noell, G. H. (2007). The fundamental role of intervention implementation in assessing response to intervention. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp ). Roach, A. T., & Elliott, S. N. (2008). Best practices in facilitating and evaluating intervention integrity. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp ).