1. Multi-Tiered System of Support Problem-Solving Process Literacy District More than Literacy

2. Multi-Tiered System of Support: Problem-Solving Presenter: Weston Johnson, Goodhue County Education District Literacy District

3. Agenda  Problem-Solving process  Merging Problem-Solving with Supports Literacy District

4. Objectives  Understand the Problem-Solving Process  Apply the Problem-Solving Process to Standard Treatments Literacy District

5. Problem-Solving Model Used for Standard Treatment IDEAL Model by Bransford and Stein Literacy District

6. Problem-Solving Overview Literacy District St. Croix River Education District/MN RTI Center

7. Step 1: Problem Identification Question: What is the discrepancy between what is expected and what is occurring? Literacy District

8. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  List Data Reviewed by the Team- Prioritizes concern, define targeted behaviors, and establish a baseline  Sources support converging evidence for area of concern (at least two)  Quantitative sources (at least one)  Organize sources by RIOT (review, interview, observation, test) Literacy District

9. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  List Criteria for Inclusion in the Intervention  Focus on discrepancy  Identify students below expectations (ex. Reading fluency)  Identify student above expectations (ex. Disruptive behaviors)  Focus on category of problem (criteria is based on measure linked to the category of the problem)  Quantitative criterion (measureable) Literacy District

10. Authentic Application Literacy District Grade 7 Reading Comprehension Intervention

11. Things to Consider  Identify and Plan Interventions *  Identify interventions based on need  Create a few (revise when necessary)  Consider Resources Available (15-25%) Literacy District *Secondary connection

12. Things to Consider  Identify Students Meeting Criteria  Organize data  Sort students by intensity of problem  Consider students with converging data  Students not included  Miss identified (more data)  Waitlisted  Continue to monitor  Refer to another team Literacy District

13. Additional Approaches to Problem Identification  One Measures- Below 20 th percentile  Two Measures- First target students below 25 th percentile on both  Three Measures- First target students below 25 th percentile on all, then on two until percentage max is reached  Sending Students Directly to Tier 3 or Referral  Cautiously use pre-intervention level (25-16-10 rule)  Consider additional information  Pre-referral interventions (Burns & Gibbons, 2008, p. 48-51)

14. Step 2: Problem Analysis Question: Why is the problem occurring? Literacy District

15. Application to Standard Treatment  Standard Treatments are a Default Approach  Problem Analysis is Used to Refine Standard Treatments  Initial Development  Revisions to Standard Treatment “... a high quality solution is readily available in the education system.” Literacy District (Christ & Aranas, 2014, p. 92)

16. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  Consider Common Hypotheses- These are organized by ICEL (instruction, curriculum, environment, learner)  It is too hard (Curriculum)  They have not had enough help to do it (Instruction)  They have not spent enough time doing it (Instruction)  They haven not had to do it in that way before (Instruction)  They do not want to do it (Learner)  The environment is not supporting learning (Environment) Literacy District

17. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  Describe Common Needs Identified Among the Group  Pre-requisite instruction (Curriculum: Pre-requisites)  Additional instruction/guidance (Instruction: Acquisition)  Additional practice(Instruction: Fluency/Proficiency)  Additional opportunities for generalization (Instruction: Generalization)  Motivation to perform (Learner: Motivation)  Supportive environmental changes (Environment) Literacy District

18. Authentic Application Literacy District Grade 7 Reading Comprehension Intervention

19. Things to Consider  Interventions with Multiple Hypotheses  Same intervention  Similar intervention Literacy District

20. Step 3: Plan Development Question: What is the goal? Literacy District

21. Step 3: Plan Development Question: What is the intervention plan? Literacy District

22. Step 3: Plan Development Question: How will progress be monitored? Literacy District

23. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  Write the Goal  Measureable  Expected outcomes (use grade-level targets) Literacy District

24. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  Describe the Intervention  Brief description  Description of needed material  Intervention implementor  When  Where  How often Literacy District

25. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  Define Measurement Logistics  Data collection system  What will be recorded  When will data be collected  Data collector  Frequency of monitoring  Decide on a Decision-Making Rule  Consecutive data-point rule  Level of performance  Slope/trend analysis Literacy District

26. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  Additional Information  Start date of intervention  Review date of intervention  Time of grade-level or PLC meeting Literacy District

27. Authentic Application Literacy District Grade 7 Reading Comprehension Intervention

28. Things to Consider  Involve Parents  Involve Students  Collecting Supplemental Progress Monitoring Data  Improved Match to Targeted Area  Mastery measures  Material Level Literacy District (Burns & Gibbons, 2008)

29. Things to Consider  Supplemental Intervention  Must be more explicit  Must be more intensive  Must be more supportive (emotionally and cognitively)  Must include progress monitoring Literacy District (Tilly, 2008)

30. Things to Consider  Intensity-Part 1  Correctly targeted  Explicit instruction  Appropriate level of challenge  High opportunity to respond  Feedback Literacy District (Burns, VanDerHeyden, & Boice, 2008)

31. Things to Consider  Intensity-Part 2  Cognitive processing support (e.g., self-regulation)  Explicit instruction  Systematic instruction  Opportunities for student response and feedback  Increase instructional time  Reduce group size Literacy District (Vaughn, Wanzek, & Murray, 2012)

32. Things to Consider  Intensity-Part 3  More explicit  More modeling  More systematic  More opportunities to respond  More review Literacy District (Robinson, n.d.)

33. Step 4: Plan Implementation Question: How will intervention integrity be ensured? Literacy District

34. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  Intervention Protocol Review  Implemented as designed  Direct observation (100% fidelity as the standard)  Plan Logistics Fidelity  Number of sessions  Duration of sessions  Was a student excessively sick? Literacy District

35. Authentic Application Literacy District Grade 7 Reading Comprehension Intervention

36. Authentic Application Literacy District Grade 7 Reading Comprehension Intervention

37. Things to Consider  Identify a Team Member to Directly Observe  Interventions Not Implemented with Fidelity Require Support  Communicate Progress with Teachers and Parents Literacy District

38. Step 5: Plan Evaluation Question: Was the intervention plan successful? Literacy District

39. Application to Standard Treatment (cheat sheet)  Mid-Intervention Checks  Date and data points  Decision-making rules  Maintain  Adjust  Change or Discontinue  Results and Next Steps  Minimum intervention  Attach the graph  Team decisions Literacy District

40. Authentic Application Literacy District Grade 7 Reading Comprehension Intervention

41. Things to Consider  Recycle Through the Process  Fade the Intervention  Communicate Results  Consider Referrals  School-level  SPED Literacy District (Burns & Gibbons, 2008)

42. The End Literacy District

43. References  American Academy of Pediatrics. (2004). Policy statement on school-based mental health service. Pediatrics, 113, 1839-1845.  Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. (2012). Implementing Response-to-Intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.  Burns, M. K., VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Boice, C. H.(2008). Best practices in delivery of intensive academic interventions. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 1151-1162). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.  Daly, E. J. III, Witt, J. C., Martens, B. K., & Dool, E. J. (1997). A model for conducting a functional analysis of academic performance problems. School Psychology Review, 26, 554-574.  Christ, T. J., & Aranas, Y. A. (2014). Best practices in problem analysis. In P. L. Harrison & J. A. Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology: Data-based and collaborative decision making (pp. 87-98).Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.  Reschly, D. J. (2008). School psychology paradigm shift and beyond. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 3-15). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Literacy District

44. References  Roach, A. T., Lawton, K., & Elliott, S. N.. (2014). Best practices in facilitating and evaluating the integrity of school-based interventions. In P. L. Harrison & J. A. Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology: Data-based and collaborative decision making (pp. 133-146).Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.  Riley-Tillman, T. C., Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. (2013). RTI Applications (Vol. 2). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.  Robinson, W. (n. d.). MN Response to Intervention Center: MN RTI Center Tiered Inst. Retrieved March 2, 2011, from http://www.scred.k12.mn.us/School/documents/MnRTICenterTieredInstructioninRea ding.ppt  Stoiber, K. C. (2014). A comprehensive framework for multitiered systems of support in school psychology. In P. L. Harrison & J. A. Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology: Data-based and collaborative decision making (pp. 41-70). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.  Tilly, W. D., III. (2008). The evaluation of school psychology to science-based practice: Problem solving and the three-tiered model. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 17-36). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.  Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Murray, C. S., & Roberts, G. (2012). Intensive interventions for students struggling in reading and mathematics: A practice guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. Literacy District