Response to Intervention The RTI Model: An Overview for Educators Jim Wright

Response to Intervention 2 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 3 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 4 Five Core Components of RTI Service Delivery 1.Student services are arranged in a multi-tier model 2.Data are collected to assess student baseline levels and to make decisions about student progress 3.Interventions are ‘evidence-based’ 4.The ‘procedural integrity’ of interventions is measured 5.RTI is implemented and developed at the school- and district-level to be scalable and sustainable over time Source: Glover, T. A., & DiPerna, J. C. (2007). Service delivery for response to intervention: Core components and directions for future research. School Psychology Review, 36,

Response to Intervention 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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. Al 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 9 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 10

Response to Intervention 11 Complementary RTI Models: Standard Treatment & Problem-Solving Protocols “The two most commonly used RTI approaches are (1) standard treatment and (2) problem- solving protocol. While these two approaches to RTI are sometimes described as being very different from each other, they actually have several common elements, and both fit within a problem-solving framework. In practice, many schools and districts combine or blend aspects of the two approaches to fit their needs.” Source: Duffy, H. (August 2007). Meeting the needs of significantly struggling learners in high school. Washington, DC: National High School Center. Retrieved from p. 5

Response to Intervention 12 RTI Interventions: Standard-Treatment vs. Problem-Solving There are two different vehicles that schools can use to deliver RTI interventions: Standard-Protocol (Standalone Intervention). Programs based on scientifically valid instructional practices (‘standard protocol’) are created to address frequent student referral concerns. These services are provided outside of the classroom. A middle school, for example, may set up a structured math-tutoring program staffed by adult volunteer tutors to provide assistance to students with limited math skills. Students referred for a Tier II math intervention would be placed in this tutoring program. An advantage of the standard- protocol approach is that it is efficient and consistent: large numbers of students can be put into these group interventions to receive a highly standardized intervention. However, standard group intervention protocols often cannot be individualized easily to accommodate a specific student’s unique needs. Problem-solving (Classroom-Based Intervention). Individualized research-based interventions match the profile of a particular student’s strengths and limitations. The classroom teacher often has a large role in carrying out these interventions. A plus of the problem-solving approach is that the intervention can be customized to the student’s needs. However, developing intervention plans for individual students can be time-consuming.

Response to Intervention 13 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 4-7 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 1-2 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 14 Group-Based Tier 2 Services: How Much Time Should Be Allocated? Emerging guidelines drawn largely from reading research suggest that standard protocol interventions should consist of at least three to five 30-minute sessions per week, in a group size not to exceed 7 students. Standard protocol interventions should also supplement, rather than replace, core instruction taking place in the classroom. Sources: Burns, Al Otaiba, S. & Torgesen, J. (2007). Effects from intensive standardized kindergarten and first-grade interventions for the prevention of reading difficulties. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention (pp ). National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health & Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

Response to Intervention 15 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 16 Tier 2 RTI Services: Challenges for Middle & High Schools There are significant challenges in making Tier 2 supplemental intervention services available to secondary students. For example: Scheduling of supplemental intervention services can be difficult Academic needs may vary dramatically across students, making it difficult to recruit Tier 2 groups that have a shared intervention focus Intervention providers may not have sufficient training to identify and remediate off-level student skills Pressure to get the student through current courses may result in Tier 2 becoming ‘homework help & test preparation’

Response to Intervention 17 Secondary Level Tier 2 RTI Services: Scheduling Scheduling options for RTI Tier 2 services often represent a compromise. Here are some ideas that schools have adopted at the secondary level to schedule RTI services: ‘ Zero period’. An optional period is added to the start of the school day— students get their electives during this period, freeing up time in the schedule later in the day for Tier 2. Schoolwide RTI period. The school takes a small amount of time from each period (e.g., five minutes) to create a minute building-wide RTI period where all students get remediation, review, or enrichment. ‘ Double-Period’ remediation courses. Struggling students are placed in double-period courses (often with push-in staff assistance) to allow additional time, targeting of deficient skills. Scheduling of struggling students in groups. Students with shared ‘at- risk’ profile are placed on a similar schedule to allow them to be placed in intervention services if needed. Those students who make good progress by mid-year are moved to a study hall.

Response to Intervention 18 Level Tier 2 RTI Services: Programming Tier 2 intervention programs may be group- based or computer-administered. A good source for possible Tier 2 intervention programs is the What Works Clearinghouse at:

Response to Intervention 19 Tier 3: Intensive Individualized Interventions (Problem- Solving Model) Tier 3 interventions are the most intensive offered in a school setting. About 5 % of a general-education student population may qualify for Tier 3 supports. Typically, the RTI Problem-Solving Team meets to develop intervention plans for Tier 3 students. 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 at least 30 minutes. The student-teacher ratio is flexible but should allow the student to receive intensive, individualized instruction. The academic or behavioral 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 20

Response to Intervention 21 Advancing Through RTI: Flexibility in the Tiers For purposes of efficiency, students should be placed in small-group instruction at Tier 2. However, group interventions may not always be possible because – due to scheduling or other issues—no group is available. (For example, students with RTI behavioral referrals may not have a group intervention available.) In such a case, the student will go directly to the problem-solving process (Tier 3)—typically through a referral to the school RTI Team. Nonetheless, the school must still document the same minimum number of interventions attempted for every student in RTI, whether or not a student first received interventions in a group setting.

Response to Intervention 22 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 NYSED RTI Guidance Memo: April 2008

Response to Intervention 24

Response to Intervention 25 “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 26 “ 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 27 “ 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 28 “The Regents policy framework for RtI: Defines RtI to minimally include: Requires each school district to establish a plan and policies for implementing school-wide approaches and prereferral interventions in order to remediate a student’s performance prior to referral for special education, which may include the RtI process as part of a district’s school-wide approach. The school district must select and define the specific structure and components of its RtI program, including, but not limited to the: -criteria for determining the levels of intervention to be provided to students, -types of interventions, amount and nature of student performance data to be collected, and -manner and frequency for progress monitoring.”

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

Response to Intervention 30 ‘Teacher Tolerance’ as an Indicator of RTI Intervention Capacity “I call the range of students whom [teachers] come to view as adequately responsive – i.e., teachable – as the tolerance; those who are perceived to be outside the tolerance are those for whom teachers seek additional resources. The term “tolerance” is used to indicate that teachers form a permissible boundary on their measurement (judgments) in the same sense as a confidence interval. In this case, the teacher actively measures the distribution of responsiveness in her class by processing information from a series of teaching trials and perceives some range of students as within the tolerance.” (Gerber, 2002) Source: Gerber, M. M. (2003). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

Response to Intervention RTI & ‘Teacher Reluctance’ The willingness of teachers to implement interventions is essential in any school to the success of the RTI model. Yet general-education teachers may not always see themselves as ‘interventionists’ and indeed may even resist the expectation that they will provide individualized interventions as a routine part of their classroom practice (Walker, 2004). It should be remembered, however, that teachers’ reluctance to accept elements of RTI may be based on very good reasons. Here are some common reasons that teachers might be reluctant to accept their role as RTI intervention ‘first responders’… 31

Response to Intervention 32 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 33 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 34 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 35 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 36 Team Activity: Engaging the Reluctant Teacher…

Response to Intervention Ideas to Build Teacher Understanding and Support for RTI Jim Wright

Response to Intervention Offer RTI information to teachers in a series of short presentations or discussion forums A common mistake that schools make in rolling out RTI is to present their teachers with RTI information in a single, long presentation—with little opportunity for questions or discussion. Instead, schools should plan a series of RTI information-sharing sessions with teachers throughout the school year. Any large-group RTI training sessions (e.g., at faculty meetings) should be kept short, to ensure that the audience is not overwhelmed with large volumes of information. Consider using smaller instructional team or department meetings as a vehicle for follow-up presentations, discussion, and teacher questions about RTI.

Response to Intervention Offer RTI information to teachers in a series of short presentations or discussion forums ACTION STEP: Create a year-long RTI information-sharing plan. Determine what RTI information your school would like to present to staff, as well as the degree of faculty input and discussion needed. Then draft a year-long plan to communicate with staff about RTI. Each year, update the plan to keep faculty updated about implementation of the RTI model.

Response to Intervention Present RTI as a coordinated, schoolwide approach to address long-standing teacher concerns about struggling students Schools should consider framing RTI as a broad, schoolwide solution to help teachers to better instruct, motivate, and manage the behaviors of struggling learners. Teachers want fewer class disruptions, more uninterrupted instructional time, higher performing students, targeted supplemental academic help for students who need it, and better communication among educators about the needs of all students. As schools make the case for RTI, they should demonstrate how it will help teachers to manage the day-to-day challenges that they face in their classrooms.

Response to Intervention 41 ACTION STEP: Get feedback from teachers about their classroom concerns. Find opportunities to engage teachers in productive discussions about what they see as the greatest challenges facing them as instructors. Note the teacher concerns that surface most often. For each teacher concern, generate ideas for how an RTI model in your school might help teachers with that issue. Craft these ideas for instructor support into ‘talking points’ and include them in your school’s RTI presentations. 2.Present RTI as a coordinated, schoolwide approach to address long-standing teacher concerns about struggling students

Response to Intervention Solicit teacher input when building your school’s RTI model Teachers are a valuable resource that schools should tap when implementing RTI. When schools solicit teacher questions about RTI, include teachers on planning teams to help to develop the RTI process, and treat teacher objections or concerns about RTI as helpful feedback rather than stubborn resistance, those schools send the message that teachers are full partners in the RTI planning process.

Response to Intervention 43 ACTION STEP: Include teachers on the RTI Leadership Team. One of the best ways to ensure that teachers have input into the RTI development process is to include teacher representatives on the RTI Leadership Team, the group that oversees the district’s implementation of RTI. 3.Solicit teacher input when building your school’s RTI model

Response to Intervention Link all significant school and district initiatives to RTI RTI is a comprehensive, proactive model to identify and assist struggling students. Yet teachers may erroneously perceive RTI as just another ‘program’ that is likely to last for only a short time and then disappear. Any RTI training for staff should make the point that RTI is not a single-self contained program but is actually an all-inclusive and flexible framework for student support that encompasses all existing student support programs and strategies.

Response to Intervention 45 ACTION STEP: Organized all school programs under the RTI framework. Schools should present RTI as an elastic multi-tier problem-solving framework. First, the school lists all of its significant current programs or initiatives intended to assess or intervene with students with academic or behavioral needs. The school then assigns each of the programs or initiatives to Tier 1, 2, or 3 in the RTI framework. The message for staff is that, while specific programs may come and go, the overarching RTI model is both adaptable and durable-- and that much of the power of RTI rests on its potential to integrate a series of isolated programs into a larger unified and coordinated continuum of student support. 4.Link all significant school and district initiatives to RTI

Response to Intervention ‘Scaling Up’: Four Stages of RTI Development Jim Wright

Response to Intervention 47 RTI Development: Four Stages of ‘Scaling Up’ 1.Preparation. Planning activities & creating readiness in the school system for the RTI component. 2.Initial Implementation. Bringing the component into the school setting. 3.Institutionalization. Institutionalizing the RTI component as a part of routine school and district practices. 4.Ongoing Development/Updating. Ensuring that the RTI component stays current with changing revisions in state and federal guidelines and emerging findings in RTI research. Source: Ervin, R. A., & Schaughency, E. (2008). Best practices in accessing the systems change literature. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp ). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

Response to Intervention 48

Response to Intervention 49 RTI Implementation Planning Sheet: Example “GOAL: Creating Consistent Use of Effective Tier 1 Academic Strategies in Content-Area Classrooms” Stage 1: Preparation: List any preparation steps such as development of materials or staff training. Examples of Preparation Tasks:  Inventory Tier 1 Interventions Already in Use  Create a Standard Menu of Evidence-Based Tier 1 Intervention Ideas for Teachers

Response to Intervention 50 RTI Implementation Planning Sheet: Example “GOAL: Creating Consistent Use of Effective Tier 1 Academic Strategies in Content-Area Classrooms” Stage 2: Initial Implementation: Describe the tasks required to actually implement the goal. Examples of Initial Implementation Tasks:  Train Teachers to Write Specific, Measureable, Observable ‘Problem Identification Statements  Establish Tier 1 Coaching and Support Resources  Provide Classroom (Tier 1) Problem-Solving Support to Teachers  Create Formal Guidelines for Teachers to Document Tier 1 Strategies

Response to Intervention 51 RTI Implementation Planning Sheet: Example “GOAL: Creating Consistent Use of Effective Tier 1 Academic Strategies in Content-Area Classrooms” Stage 3: Institutionalization: Once the goal is initially carried out successfully, devise a plan to weave various activities that support the goal into the day-to-day institutional routine of the school. Examples of Institutionalization Tasks:  Develop Decision Rules for Referring Students from Tier 1 to Higher Levels of Intervention

Response to Intervention 52 RTI Implementation Planning Sheet: Example “GOAL: Creating Consistent Use of Effective Tier 1 Academic Strategies in Content-Area Classrooms” Stage 4: Ongoing Development/Updating: The RTI model is steadily evolving as new research indicates better methods for data collection, intervention planning, etc. The RTI Implementation Plan should include Ongoing Development/Updating tasks--ongoing activities to ensure that the district’s practices confirm to best practices over time. Examples of Ongoing Development/Updating Tasks:  Set Up a System to Locate Additional Evidence-Based Tier 1 Intervention Ideas

Response to Intervention 53 RTI Steering Committee: Using the Four Stages of ‘Scaling Up’ in Planning First, the RTI Steering Committee selects a series of ‘RTI Implementation Goals.’ These goals should be more general, global goals that will require attention through all stages of the RTI implementation process. The RTI Steering Committee then takes each of the general RTI Implementation Goals and breaks the global goal into a series of specific subtasks. Subtasks are sorted by stage of implementation.

Response to Intervention Recommended RTI Websites New York State RTI Technical Assistance Center: National Center on RTI: 54

Response to Intervention 55 In your elbow groups: Review page 2 of the Planning Packet (Packet 5): RTI Plan: Element 1… Build Classroom Teacher Understanding & Support for RTI Develop a plan for sharing RTI information with teachers throughout the coming school year. Building Team Activity: Plan for Building Teacher Understanding and Support for RTI