1. An Introduction to RTI and the ORTIi Project
David Putnam, Jr., Ph.D.
ORTIi Annual Conference
April, 2016
This general session will provide an overview of RTI and the Oregon RTI project. Essential features, myths and realities, and implementation considerations will be examined. Benefits and outcomes, taken from both the research literature and from districts across Oregon, will be presented.

2. BIG IDEAS Overview of RTI and ORTIi
Implementation considerations
Essential features, myths and realities
Benefits and outcomes
This session will provide an overview of a healthy RTI system.  We will review the essential components of RTI, describe the dynamic process of data-based decision-making, highlight “Myths”, and clarify “Facts”. This session will also outline the service delivery model of the Oregon RTIi project and provide participants with an understanding of what it means to participate in the ORTIi project.

3. Harmonic Convergence and Golden Opportunity
EBP
DBDM
Law, Policy, Economics
Neuroscience
Implementation Science
Skilled
Educators
RTI/
MTSS
Convergence of factors. Ven diagram for taking notes. Colored pens.
Data systems—DIBELS, etc.; DBDM; Technology to store an actually use display analyze data. Shift to accountability—(Charts and graphs video)
Evidence- based practices. We know what works! Hattie--visible learning. Dave shared this last year. Use Jon’s slide
Change to a culture of data
Policy and practices: IDEA n RTI, OSEP
Neuroscience
Implementation science

4. But we are Failing Far Too Many Students
NAEP
OAKS
DIBELS, EasyCBM, AIMSweb
College & Career Readiness
CCSS

5. How are we doing? Compared to others..

6. Proficiency: What States Say versus What NAEP Says
Each state defines for itself what “proficient” means; some states have a rigorous definition, while others are less strict in their standards. To see how states compare, ECF has published charts showing the percentage of students deemed proficient in various subjects and grade levels and compared them to percentages reported for each state by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, or “The Nation’s Report Card”), considered to be the gold standard. See how your state fares in the following areas:

7. Oregon Reading Achievement Gap 2013-2014

8. Overview of RTI
and ORTIi

9. Oregon Response to Instruction and Intervention
Vision Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve… every day. Mission Cultivate the thinking and skills in leadership at all levels to build and sustain a comprehensive multi-level system of prevention and support that identifies and serves the instructional needs of all children.

10. Oregon RTI Project Growth & Lessons Learned
TTSD Prior to Contract with ODE:
Implementing PBIS District Wide
Installing RTI for ALL and SLD
Working with ODE on Policy and Procedures

11. Cadre 1: 2005-2006 # of Districts: 4 % of Oregon Student Population
Pendleton
Tigard-Tualatin
Sheridan
Ontario
Roseburg
% of Oregon Student Population
# of Districts: 4

12. Cadre 2: 2006-2007 # of Districts: 13 % of Oregon Student Population
North Clackamas
Ione
Hood River
Canby
Pilot Rock
Crow-Applegate-Lorane
Bethel
Lowell
Nyssa
% of Oregon Student Population
# of Districts: 13

13. Cadre 3: 2007-2008 # of Districts: 18 % of Oregon Student Population
Astoria
Sherwood
Nestucca Valley
Scio
Baker
Grants Pass
% of Oregon Student Population
# of Districts: 18

14. Leadership Matters….Most!!!
Cadre 4:
Leadership Matters….Most!!!
Hermiston
Seaside
Fern Ridge
Central Curry
% of Oregon Student Population
# of Districts: 22

15. Its all about the Core Cadre 5: 2009-2010 # of Districts: 28
Knappa
Cascade
Springfield
Crook County
Bend-LaPine
North Bend
% of Oregon Student Population
# of Districts: 28

16. Go Slow to Go Fast Cadre 6: 2010-2011 # of Districts: 37
Parkrose*
Gresham-Barlow*
Estacada
Lebanon
Sweet Home
Sisters
Bandon
Glendale
Central Point
% of Oregon Student Population
# of Districts: 37

17. Why & How Before What Cadre 7: 2011-2012 Cadre 7: 2011-2012
St. Helens
David Douglas
Junction City
Yoncalla
North Lake
Paisley
Klamath County
Lake County
% of Oregon Student Population
# of Districts: 45

18. Prof. Learning & Transfer of Knowledge Cadre 8: 2012-2013
Clatskanie*
Morrow
Forest Grove
North Powder
North Marion
Mitchell
McKenzie*
John Day
Reedsport
Butte Falls
% of Oregon Student Population
# of Districts: 55

19. Distributed Practice: Repeated Trainings
Cadre 9:
Rainer
Gladstone
Mapleton
*Projected population % based on enrollment data
Harney County
Coquille
Sutherlin
Port Orford
Brookings-Harbour
% of Oregon Student Population*
# of Districts: 63
*Projected

20. Cadre 9.2: 2013-2014 TTSD # of Districts: 72 BLSD OSD RSD
Clatskanie
Milton-Freewater
North Wasco
Jewell
TTSD
BLSD
OSD
*Projected population % based on enrollment data
Creswell
RSD
Eagle Point
Plush
Adel
Three Rivers
Klamath Falls City
% of Oregon Student Population*
# of Districts: 72
*Projected

21. Culturally Responsive Practices
School Culture and
Culturally Responsive Practices
Cadre 10:
Scappoose
Mollala River
Neah-Kah-Nie
Parkrose
Gaston
TTSD
Jefferson County
Jefferson
Pine-Eagle
Monroe
Albany
Marcola
BLSD
OSD
*Projected population % based on enrollment data
McKenzie
Harney ESD
Crane
Diamond
Double O
Drewsey
Frenchglen
Pine Creek
South Harney
Suntex
RSD
Pinehurst
% of Oregon Student Population*
# of Districts: 84
*Projected

22. Culturally Responsive Practices
School Culture and
Culturally Responsive Practices
Cadre 10:
Scappoose
Mollala River
Neah-Kah-Nie
Parkrose
Gaston
TTSD
Jefferson County
Middle School:
Seaside
Sisters
Sutherlin
Sweet Home
Jefferson
Pine-Eagle
Monroe
Albany
Marcola
BLSD
OSD
*Projected population % based on enrollment data
McKenzie
Harney ESD
Crane
Diamond
Double O
Drewsey
Frenchglen
Pine Creek
South Harney
Suntex
RSD
Pinehurst
% of Oregon Student Population*
# of Districts: 89
*Projected

23. Culturally Responsive Practices
School Culture and
Culturally Responsive Practices
Cadre 10:
Scappoose
Mollala River
Neah-Kah-Nie
Parkrose
Gaston
TTSD
Jefferson County
Math:
Baker
Bethel
Crook County
Grants Pass
N. Clackamas
Jefferson
Pine-Eagle
Monroe
Albany
Marcola
BLSD
OSD
*Projected population % based on enrollment data
McKenzie
Harney ESD
Crane
Diamond
Double O
Drewsey
Frenchglen
Pine Creek
South Harney
Suntex
RSD
Pinehurst
% of Oregon Student Population*
# of Districts: 91
*Projected

24. ORTIi Today 2015-16 2nd year of a three year contract
With option of three year extension
Moved from 5 to 3 years
“Time is of the essence”
Added MS Cadre last year
Added Math cadre this year
Focus on Culturally Responsive Instruction and closing the achievement gap

25. Essential Features of RTI

26. Technical & Adaptive Support Data- Based Decision Making
ORTIi
Essential Components
ORTIi Essential Components
SLD Decision Making
Vision
Standards of Practice
Communi c-ation
Technical & Adaptive Support
Teaming Structures
Data- Based Decision Making
Decision Rules
Ongoing & Embedded :
Training
Coaching
Fidelity
Progress Monitoring
Interventions
Screening/Early Warning System
Culture: High expectations for all student populations, belief that all student populations can learn, belief that the measurement of how well I teach is how well they learn
Leadership:
Teaming/DBDM: Disaggregate data,
Professional Learning & Support:d
Core: Sheltered instruction, implicit, opportunities to respond,
Core/Coordinated Literacy
Leadership
Teaming/Data-Based Decision Making
Professional Learning & Support
Culture
High Expectations
For ALL Student
Populations

27. SPED referral INSTRUCTION/ BEHAVIOR DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING
ASSESSMENT
INSTRUCTION/
BEHAVIOR
DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING
Comprehensive Evaluation
SPED referral
Formal Diagnostic
As needed
Tier 3 Individualized Intervention
Individual Problem Solving Team
6-8 weeks
Individual Problem Solving Team
Progress Monitoring
Weekly-Monthly
Tier 2/3 Supplemental Intervention
Tier 2/3 Supplemental Intervention
Intervention Review Team
6-8 weeks
Parent notified at every red flag
Individual Education Program (IEP)
Universal Screening
3 times/year
Research-Based Core Curriculum w/ Strong Instruction
Schoolwide Screening reviewed
3 times/year

28. RTI
Myths and Facts

29. Myth
Fact

30. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)

31. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples

32. Response to Intervention
Myth #1: This too shall pass
Response to Intervention
Historically speaking, RTI is about effective practices for all students
Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (2004)
2000’s
1990’s
1980’s
1970’s
1960’s
National Reading Panel
Multi-tiered instruction
Progress monitoring
Formative evaluation
Problem Solving Model
Direct Instruction
Curriculum-Based Measurement

33. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples
2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification

34. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples
2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification
2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students and assess SLD

35. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples
2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification
2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students
3. RTI is just about interventions

36. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples
2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification
2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students
3. RTI is just about interventions
3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support

37. It’s all about core instruction

38. “RTI Kids”
ALL your students

39. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples
2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification
2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students
3. RTI is just about interventions
3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support
4. RTI looks the same in every school/district

40. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples
2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification
2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students
3. RTI is just about interventions
3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support
4. RTI looks the same in every school/district
4. RTI is uniquely designed at each building

41. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples
2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification
2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students
3. RTI is just about interventions
3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support
4. RTI looks the same in every school/district
4. RTI is uniquely designed for each building
5. Using RTI puts you at severe risk of child find litigation

42. Myth
Fact
1. RTI is the new fad that will go away (i.e. “this too shall pass”)
1. RTI is systematic method for delivering instruction, based on decades of research & effective large-scale implementation examples
2. Purpose of RTI is SPED identification
2. RTI is a systematic way to support the needs of ALL students
3. RTI is just about interventions
3. RTI is about improving the instructional practices of ALL teachers at ALL levels of support
4. RTI looks the same in every school/district
4. RTI is uniquely designed for each building
5. Using RTI puts you at significant risk for litigation
5. RTI provides a proactive and legally robust way to identify students as SLD

43. RTI for SLD is Legally, Procedurally, and Ethically the Right Thing to Do
IDEA 2004: All states MUST permit the use of RTI
Primary features of RTI required for ALL SLD evaluations regardless of method
RTI Approach better serves the needs of all students
Research-based interventions can change a child’s brain and skills from disabled to not-disabled
Federal Register and OARS explicit that cognitive evaluation is NOT REQUIRED
Few challenges to RTI have reached the courts and the majority of decisions have been deferential to districts

44. Benefits & Outcomes

45. Impact on SPED: Research Support
“Use of RTI has resulted in lower rates of SLD (Burns, Appleton, & Stehouwer, 2005) improved proportionality or indicators of equity, earlier delivery of special education services, and increased student achievement (Marston, Muyskens, Lau, & Canter, 2003)”
A. M. VanDerheyden & M. K. Burns (2010)

46. ORTIi vs. Non OrRTI District Comparison
Since the inception of Oregon RTI in , students in school districts participating in Oregon RTI were more likely to meet or exceed on OAKS Reading than students in Oregon school districts non participating in Oregon RTI, in any given year.

47. 20/30 or 67% of ORTIi districts outperformed the state average
% of 3rd Graders Passing SBAC (Reading) by District Economically Disadvantaged
These are district that had five years to build their system. Majority of them are outperforming the state for economically disadvantaged students
State Average %
20/30 or 67% of ORTIi districts outperformed the state average

48. % of 3rd Graders Passing SBAC (Reading) by District Hispanic/Latino
These are district that had five years to build their system. Majority of them are outperforming the state for Hispanic/Latino students
State Average – 26.9%
16/22 or 73% of ORTIi districts outperformed the state average

49. 5 year change in % of students (K-5) at or above benchmark by school
11 schools
Out of all the schools in Cadres 1 and 2 that had complete DIBELS data for the first 5 years:
47 schools increased the percentage of kids at or above benchmark (based on K-5 DIBELS)
11 schools did not increase the percentage of kids at or above benchmark (based on K-5 DIBELS)
Or another way to put it – 81% of schools in Cadres 1 and 2 improved student achievement, while 19% did not.
47 schools, 81%

50. 5 year change in % of students (K-5) well below benchmark/intensive by school
41 schools, 71%
Out of all the schools in Cadres 1 and 2 that had complete DIBELS data for the first 5 years:
41 schools decreased in the percentage of kids well below benchmark/intensive (based on K-5 DIBELS)
17 schools did not decrease the percentage of kids well below benchmark/intensive (based on K-5 DIBELS)
Or another way to put it – 71% of schools in Cadres 1 and 2 decreased their population of students with intensive needs, while 29% did not.
17 schools

51. The Importance of Effective Core Instruction (Cadre 1)

52. Cadre 1: Core Implementation
School has 90-minute (or less) reading block* (interventions occur WITHIN the core)
*60 minute block for ½ day kindergarten
In Cadre 1, schools that reported they did not develop their core instructional program only saw an increase of 1.7% (over the first 5 years of implementation) in the percentage of students meeting the benchmark on the DIBELS reading assessment (Kindergarten through 5th grade).
+1.7%
*K – NWF; 1st-5th – grade ORF

53. Cadre 1: Core Implementation
School has 90-minute reading block* (interventions occur OUTSIDE of the core)
In Cadre 1, schools that reported they created a 90 minute block for reading, but did not ensure fidelity of implementation within that 90 minutes saw an increase of 8.3% (over the first 5 years of implementation) in the percentage of students meeting the benchmark on the DIBELS reading assessment (Kindergarten through 5th grade).
+8.3%
+1.7%
*K – NWF; 1st-5th – grade ORF

54. Cadre 1: Core Implementation
School has a 90-minute reading block* (interventions occur OUTSIDE of the core)
AND
Common, agreed-upon grade-level instructional strategies.
+16.5%
In Cadre 1, schools that reported they created a 90 minute block for reading AND ensured fidelity of implementation of curriculum and instruction within that 90 minutes saw an increase of 16.5% (over the first 5 years of implementation) in the percentage of students meeting the benchmark on the DIBELS reading assessment (Kindergarten through 5th grade).
+8.3%
+1.7%
*K – NWF; 1st-5th – grade ORF

55. What Matters Most is…
…what teachers do

56. Districts Implementing RTI Effectively

57. Tigard-Tualatin School District
% of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading
(difference from Oregon State average)
School Year
School Year

58. Baker School District Cadre 3
% of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading
(difference from Oregon State average)
School Year
= Year 1 in OrRTI

59. Central Curry School District Cadre 4
% of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading
(difference from Oregon State average)
School Year
= Year 1 in OrRTI

60. Bend-LaPine School District Cadre 5
% of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading
(difference from Oregon State average)
School Year
= Year 1 in OrRTI

61. Bandon School District Cadre 6
% of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading
(difference from Oregon State average)
School Year
= Year 1 in OrRTI

62. Sisters School District Cadre 6
% of 3rd, 4th, & 5th Graders who Met or Exceeded on OAKS Reading
(difference from Oregon State average)
School Year
= Year 1 in OrRTI

63. Identification Rates: OrRTI
Avg. % of Students Identified SLD
24 out of 29 districts moved in the direction of the mean
State Average: 2011
3.1
OrRTI Cadres 1-6 Prior to Entering
4.7
OrRTI Cadres 1-6 in 2011
(at least 1 year after entering)
3.5
Reduction
26%

64. How do we support the HOW and the WHAT?
Conference style trainings with a twist
On-site coaching, consultation, and co-training
Lab School visits
Remote Consultation
Web-based resources
1 Goal:
Help districts build internal capacity to
Train
Sustain
Innovate

65. Install, Implement, Refine
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Why & How
Culture
Leadership, DBDM, PL
TIER 1
Core/Co. Lit
EWS/Screen
100% Mtgs
TIER 2/3
Interventions X
Placement
Prog. Mon.
Int. Rev. Mtg.
SPED
IPS/SLD

66. Opportunities with ORTIi
Applications for fall of available Spring (anticipated):
Elementary Literacy
Middle School Literacy
Elementary Math
Applications for fall of available Spring (anticipated):

67. Thank You!
David Putnam, Director, ORTIi