Using Root Cause Analysis to Choose Interventions

Using Root Cause Analysis to Choose Interventions
Robert Frantum-Allen, MA Mt. Evans BOCES August 2014

Intro and Norms

The Trouble with Handouts 
Paper on Specially Designed Instruction and Root Cause Analysis Today’s Presentation Sample Root Cause Analysis in Reading on 6 students Blank Templates for Root Cause Analysis

Participants will discuss application and develop next steps
Outcomes Participants will be able to explain various problem solving strategies and apply them to identifying student needs Participants will apply the ‘fishbone analysis’ to determine individual student needs Participants will discuss application and develop next steps

Agenda Problem Solving Story
Problem Solving in Public School and Lessons from Other Industries What are we trying to problem solve? Case Studies: Individual Children Case Studies: Buildings Level Next Steps

Choosing an intervention is like choosing a diet
Insert a picture of myself on Dec 19, 2013 -Decided to do something about my health, did an investigation of how to approach this and dived into it. -Prior to this time around I tried many diets (interventions) that include (click) to talk about each diet that I have tried -None of them worked for the same fundamental reason why many reading, writing and math interventions don’t work. -Let’s talk about what did work. What did I start on Dec 19th that has changed my life

Body of Evidence Researched Diets- found a company that does something very unique and was intrigued right away… Started collecting a body of evidence

Customized Meal What to eat… Breakfast
1 protein, 1 dairy, 1 fruit, 1 carb, 1 fat Snack High protein snack Lunch 1 protein, 2 vegetables, 1 fruit, 1 carb, 1 fat Dinner 1 protein, 2 vegetables, 1 fat Rules Certain fats like olive oil or avocado Majority of raw green veggies if possible As clean as possible (no GMO, and organic) Use Light Salt Limit processed foods Supports -must check in with dietitian 3 x week -increase activity -must journal -8 glasses of water -etc….. They determined based on my lifestyle (like to cook, eat out at nice restaurants, busy lifestyle, foodie), age, gender, amount of weight to loose, health needs including allergies they created a customized diet for me

Progress Monitored Average Weekly Blood Pressure

Results 252 lbs 252 242 lbs 232 lbs 231 222 lbs 212 lbs 207 200
190 182 lbs Benchmarks Click for Weight Click to remove 182 172 lbs 162 lbs 1 2 3 4 5 6

Playing Darts in the Dark
With out following the clues, building the evidence (a body of evidence) it is much like playing darts in the dark. Who knows if we ever kit the bulls eye. I guess only after a long period of time after do the benchmark testing, do we ever learn if we ever hit the bulls eye.

Ms. Jones was reflecting on the process they went through to determine Sean’s root cause and gap analysis. After looking at the Scientific Method chart she had up in her room she realized that they initiated the Scientific Method on Sean. The Fishbone analysis helped to define/identify the problem. The gap analysis helped them to form a hypothesis The implementation of the interventions is the testing of the hypothesis The weekly progress monitoring is the organizing and analysis of the data If the interventions worked then you will draw conclusions and communicate your results through the use of report cards If the interventions didn’t work then determine if the interventions were appropriate or faulty and try new experiments or interventions. So essentially the RTI process is the Scientific Method

Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS)
 Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS) Integrated Continuum All Child Find process must start with students going through the MTSS process (regardless of the child- examples provided later for who makes up a problem solving team) A Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) is the framework for how we address needs for every student within the system. This includes all academic and behavior supports that are in place for all tiers (Universal, Targeted, Intensive) The idea is that there is ONE system and MULTIPLE supports. As we consider the eligibility for special education within the context of MTSS, this framework allows us to better address the statement, “The child can receive benefit from general education alone.” Academic Continuum Behavior Continuum Adapted from the OSEP TA Center for PBIS Adapted from the OSEP TA Center for PBIS

What Does This Mean for Our School?
Problem solving teams are looking at the body of evidence to determine need. A problem solving team can be a data team, student intervention team, a special team that was created to address a unique need or and IEP team Problem solving teams design a plan to address the problem. The plan is implemented by the designated personnel. Ideally this occurs before a referral is made to special education, however this is also the same process used once a referral is made and when a team decided to do an evaluation. This is the scientific process. This is not new information. General education has always needed to provide this information as a part of the referral. The DPS Inquiry Cycle, simply holds problem solving team accountable. If done correctly, there should not be over identification for any specific disability in special education. The problem solving teams determines if the plan was effective. If the plan was not effective, attempts to adjust the plan accordingly should be made and re-implemented.

data data data data data data data data data data constipation

Strategies for Interpreting the Data: Five Why Analysis
Kiichiro Toyoda- founder of Toyota also developed a type of analysis called the 5 why analysis.

5 Why Tree is used when…. … a team needs to study a problem/issue to determine the root cause. … a team wants to study all the possible reasons to determine the most logical cause and secondary causes Mr. Roberts explained why you would use a fishbone diagram. (click) … a team needs to study a problem/issue to determine the root cause. (click) … a team wants to study all the possible reasons why a process is beginning to have difficulties, problems, or breakdowns. (click) … a team needs to identify areas for data collection. (click) … a team wants to study why a process is not performing properly or producing the designed results.

5 Why Analysis My car will not start. (the problem)
Why? - The battery is dead. (first why) Why? - The alternator is not functioning. (second why) Why? - The alternator belt has broken. (third why) Why? - The alternator belt was well beyond its useful service life and has never been replaced. (fourth why) Why? - I have not been maintaining my car according to the recommended service schedule. (fifth why, a root cause) Why? - Replacement parts are not available because of the extreme age of my vehicle. (sixth why, optional footnote) I will start maintaining my car according to the recommended service schedule. (solution) This assumes there is only one path, however in problem solving there are often multiple paths so a 5 Why’s Analysis Tree needs to be implemented.

Problem Why Why Why Why Why Why Why Why Why Why Why Why Why Why Why
Start with the problem. List possible reasons. Pretend to be a 3 year old asking “Why” Why Why Why

Struggles with writing a complete paragraph
5 Why’s Analysis Tree Struggles with writing a complete paragraph Weak transcriptions skills Doesn’t consistently use the paragraph pattern Weak translation skills Handwriting is not legible Confuses the parts of a paragraph Uses incomplete sentences Follows oral language syntax Writes from bottom up and reverses letters Struggles with focus during instruction Let’s do one together. Emphaize that the why 5 is a good next step when needing to analyze a category within the fishbone. Doesn’t know written subject predicate rules Never received handwriting instruction Has ADHD

Plus Delta Used for initial problem solving or as a way to narrow down the various issues Easy to go down a rabbit hole Tends to be subjective Simple to use Tendency for investigators to stop at symptoms rather than going on to lower-level root causes. Inability to go beyond the investigator's current knowledge - cannot find causes that they do not already know. Lack of support to help the investigator ask the right "why" questions. Results are not repeatable - different people using 5 Whys come up with different causes for the same problem. Tendency to isolate a single root cause, whereas each question could elicit many different root causes.

Businesses usually use a model for problem solving that was created in the 1960’s by a man named Kaoru Ishikawa from Japan. (click) Ishikawa was a professor at the University of Tokyo who was an innovator in quality management for large manufacturing firms. He created a systematic approach for helping to find root causes. This approach was use by Mazada motors in the development of the Miata. The approach uses something called the fishbone diagram. (click)

Fishbone diagram is used when….
… a team needs to study a problem/issue to determine the root cause. … a team wants to study all the possible reasons why a process is beginning to have difficulties, problems, or breakdowns. … a team needs to identify areas for data collection. … a team wants to study why a process is not performing properly or producing the designed results. (click) … a team needs to study a problem/issue to determine the root cause. (click) … a team wants to study all the possible reasons why a process is beginning to have difficulties, problems, or breakdowns. (click) … a team needs to identify areas for data collection. (click) … a team wants to study why a process is not performing properly or producing the designed results.

1) Draw the fishbone diagram
3) Label each bone with categories to be studied 2) List the problem in the head of the fish 4) Identify the factors within each category that maybe affecting the problem 1) Draw the fishbone diagram There are 6 basic steps in completing a fishbone chart. Draw the fishbone diagram List the problem/issues to be studied in the head of the fish Label each bone with categories to be studied Use an idea-generating technique to identify the factors within each category that maybe affecting the problem Continue until you no longer get useful information then ask “Why is this happening?” Analyze the result 5) Continue until you no longer get useful information 6) Analyze the results

Plus Delta Difficult to distinguish between necessary and sufficient condition. The fishbone assumes all bones are of equal weight and everything is a sufficient condition.

Reading Fluency Phonological Awareness Alphabetic Principle
What sources of data do we currently have for each of these categories? Reading Vocabulary and Comprehension Fluency

Strategies for Interpreting the Data: Pareto Analysis
Vilfredo Federico Damaso Pareto – an Italian engineer and philosopher. Discovered that 20% of the population of Italy owned 80% of the land. He coined the term the Perato Principal. This principal can be used to determine multiple reasons for the cause of a breakdown. Joseph Juran later determined through formulas that 80% of the effects are caused by 20% of the problems. Vilfredo Pareto Joseph Juran

Pareto Principal 80% of Effects are instigated by 20% of causes.
Create a table listing causes and frequency Arrange the rows in decreasing order Identify 20% of the risks that have the biggest impact on the overall problem

Math Skills Causes of Mistakes on math problems Frequency Percentage
Lack of Number Sense 5/25 20% Lack of Operational Sense 12/25 48% Lack of Operational Fluency Lack of Visual Spatial/Measurement knowledge 0/25 0% Lack of Algebraic Sense Lack of Problem Solving Strategies 3/25 12% There were 25 mistakes on a grade level math test. What was the primary cause of the problems on the math test? Was it due to a lack of number sense? Lack of operational sense? Lack of Operational fluency? Lack of visual spatial/measurement knowledge? Lack of algebraic sense? Or lack of Problem solving strategies? There are 6 possible causes of mathematical problem solving. 20% of 6 causes is one cause. What is the one cause that appears to be the biggest problem? Lack of Operational Sense. Therefore most of the time spent receiving specially designed instruction should focus on Operational Sense.

Plus Delta Can involve complex algorithms

Hypothesizing Function of Behavior
Positively reinforced Getting something Negatively reinforced Avoiding Something Getting something desired (This behavior is working, or has worked in the past, to gain something. In other words, the behavior maintains because it is "positively reinforced."), or Protesting, Escaping or Avoiding something undesired (This behavior is working, or has worked in the past, to remove, partially remove, or communicate displeasure about something undesired by the student. In other words, the behavior maintains because it is "negatively reinforced.")

Hypothesizing Function of Behavior
I want something I am avoiding something Student is pinching other children at 11:00 every day during reading Student blurts out the answer without raising their hand Student pushed others in line going to and from specials After five minutes of independent time, Student destroys the play center

Specific Learning Disability
Definition: Specific Learning Disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell or do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.

Psychological Processor
By yourself or with a partner, list as many psychological processors that might interfere with an individuals ability to read, write, listen, speak, or compute. Take ideas from the group.

Cognitive Sweat She had a large piece of birthday cake.
I would love to have a slice of cake. The first slice was very little. Is there a chance I could talk to the person in charge? The house mouse also likes to eat cake. Where are you going with that cake? Take a few minutes to read these sentences. Notice that some words are underlined. What is one thing all these words have in common? They all have a silent e. Why do they have a silent e. Take your words and make 6 piles for the reason why they have a silent e. Can you figure out why they have a silent e?

Why is there a silent e? 1. Cake, Slice 2. Love, Have 3. Large, Piece, Charge, Chance, Slice 4. Little 5. House, Mouse 6. Where, Are

Executive Functioning
Pre-frontal cortex is the conductor of the orchestra. Without direction from the conductor, the rest of the brain doesn’t know what to do. Disorders associated with executive functioning include ADD, ADHD, Autism, TBI, etc Those who were successful with this complex task were able to focus, pay attention, shift in mid-stream and work towards a goal.

Reasoning VERBAL NONVERBAL

run /r/ /ŭ/ /n/ Reading Processors context semantic orthographic
The major processors responsible just for reading. Orthographic recognizes symbols Phonological recognizes sounds Semantic/Context assigns meaning 42 meanings for the word run /r/ /ŭ/ /n/ orthographic phonologic

Brain Images Comparing 9-Year-Old Average Reader and 9-Year-Old Un-remediated Poor Reader
Average Reader: More activity in angular gyrus where sounds and symbols are connected. Unremediated Poor Reader: More activity in phonological processor, less activity in angular gyrus. Figure 5.2 compares brain images of a 9-year-old average reader and a 9-year-old unremediated poor reader. Brain activation patterns were recorded during nonsense word reading. Image contributed and used with permission of Dr. Panagiotis Simos, University of Crete (Simos et al, 2002). Have participants identify the differences between what is activated in a good reader’s brain versus what you see here in a poor reader’s brain. Note that Broca’s area, where speech sounds are represented, is over-activated in a poor reader, with other brain areas, in the mid and back portion of the left hemisphere, under-activated. Additionally, multiple areas of the right hemisphere are activated; an ineffective, inefficient way in which to activate brain patterns.

Changes in Brain Activation Patterns in Response to Instruction
Figure 5.3 shows changes in activation patterns in response to instruction (8-year-old poor reader receiving remediation). Make note of the differences between the two brain hemispheres before versus after remediation. p. 63

Processing Speed rapid retrieval accuracy
Processing speed is a measure of memory– long term, short term and working memory accuracy

Language Processing Oral expression and listening comprehension. It is process the semantics and syntax of language.

Academic Fishbone

Reading Fluency Phonological Awareness Alphabetic Principle
Vocabulary and Comprehension Fluency

Handwriting/ Keyboarding
Spelling Writing Composition Grammar

Number Sense Operational Sense Math Fluency Problem Solving

Reading: Scarborough's Rope
● Background Knowledge ● Vocabulary Knowledge ● Language Structures ● Verbal Reasoning ● Literacy Knowledge ● Phonological Awareness ● Decoding (and Spelling) ● Sight Recognition SKILLED READING: fluent execution and coordination of word recognition and text comprehension. LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION WORD RECOGNITION increasingly automatic strategic Reading involves perception (seeing, hearing or feeling text), Introspection to make text to self connections, memory to recall vocabulary and ideas and manipulation of text being immediately read, Imagination to visualized the story/ideas, conceptions to process phonological, orthographic and language information, Reasoning to make inferences, summarize and cause and effect, and volition to stick with the task Reading is a very complex activity summarized by Hollis Scarborough in the Rope model Reading is a multifaceted skill, gradually acquired over years of instruction and practice.

Subtypes of Reading Disability
Phonology and language comprehension Fluency/naming speed and language comprehension Phonology and fluency/naming speed All three issues

Phonological Awareness (Blevins, Rosner and Words their Way)
Fishbone Analysis Phonological Awareness (Blevins, Rosner and Words their Way) Alphabetic Principle (Core Phonics, Words their Way, LETRS Morphological Awareness) Name: ________________ Morphology: # of phoneme errors on spelling test: Alphabet Skills: Reading and Decoding: Spelling Skills: Rosner Auditory Analysis: Rhyme: Oddity Task: Oral Blending: Oral Segmentation: Phonemic Manipulation: # of Orthographic errors on spelling: Reading ORF Rate: Reading Level: ORF Accuracy: Oral Language Vocabulary: Color naming RAN: Site Words: Reading Vocabulary: Executive Functioning Skills: Reasoning Skills: Other: Vocabulary and Comprehension (DRA/SRI, Core Vocabulary and Critchlaw) Fluency (ORF, Fry and RAN)

Case Study: Angela

Case Study K-2 Reached Benchmarks 3rd Grade CSAP Satisfactory
4th Grade CSAP P. Proficient 5th Grade CSAP Unsatisfactory Currently 6th Grade at a K-8 School SRI Lexile- 498 or 2nd grade

Case Study Student Intervention Team Academic Detectives
Read Naturally for 2 days a week Guided Reading Plus for 3 days a week Progress Monitoring Oral Reading Fluency – no progress after 6 weeks.

Case Study Special Education Program Manager
GORT- showed she is at the 21%ile Program Manager Called the program manager and not sure what to do Review indicated a very poor BOE A BOE was developed

Phonological Awareness Alphabetic Principle
Angela is struggling with reading Reading Level: SRI 498 GORT: 21%ile CSAP: Unsatisfactory DPS Benchmark (spring 2010) PP DRA Level 40 MAZE Passage: 38%ile Fluency Vocabulary and Comprehension

Clues table tibl tabl tebl

Total number of seconds
Grade level >111 < K 111-95 K 94-76 1st grade 75-67 2nd grade 66-64 3rd grade 63-59 4th grade 58-52 5th grade 51-49 6th grade 48-45 7th grade 45-40 8th grade <40 9th grade +

Alphabetic Principle (Core Phonics, Words their Way, LETRS Morphological Awareness) No concern Morphology: Structural analysis 1/12 Inflectional Morphemes 11/12 Derivational Morphemes 0/12 Slight Concern # of phoneme errors on spelling test: 57% Serious Concern Angela is struggling with reading Rosner Auditory Analysis: 1st Grade Level Phoneme/Grapheme: Short vowels: 21/21 Consonant Blends w/ short vowels: 15/15 Short vowels, digraphs, and trigraph: 15/15 R-Controlled vowels:13/15 Long vowels spellings: 13/15 Variant Vowels: 10/15 Low frequency vowel /consonant spellings: 8/15 Multisyllabic words: 14/24 Rhyme: 11/12 Oddity Task: 12/12 Oral Blending: 12/12 Oral Segmentation: 23/24 Phonemic Manipulation: 12/12 Reading Level: GORT: 21%ile CSAP: Unsatisfactory DPS Benchmark PP DRA 40 (5th grade level) MAZE Passage: 38%ile ORF Rate: 93.8 Below Average ORF Accuracy: 92% Below Average Color naming RAN: 6th grade level Site Words: San Diego 5th grade level What do you notice in the data? GORT Fluency: 16%ile Oral Language Vocabulary: 7th Grade Level Executive Function: excellent focus, initiates tasks, can shift in midstream; no concerns with executive functioning Reasoning : excellent verbal and non-verbal reasoning Other: English is first language; no family history of reading problems; older sibling have no issues with academics; engaged family; no sig medical concerns Reading Vocabulary: 5th grade level Vocabulary and Comprehension (DRA/SRI and Critchlaw) Fluency (ORF, Fry and RAN)

Root Causes of Reading Difficulty
Executive Functioning Concerns Root Causes of Reading Difficulty yes Name: ___________Angela ________________ Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with executive functioning? 1. Student has the ability to sustain focus when basic skills are automatic Prioritize the concerns _____Basic Phonological_________ _____Basic Orthographic _________ ______________________________ no Reasoning Concerns Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with reasoning ? yes 2. Student is able to learn through various methods (mastery, inquiry) no Basic Reading Phonological Concern Reading Comprehension Concerns Basic Reading Orthographic Concern yes Is there evidence to suggest problems with phonological processing? yes Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with Language Processing ? Is there evidence to suggest problems with orthographic processing? yes 3. no no Create the Treatment Plan no Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with processing speed? Reading Fluency Concerns no yes

Fishbone Analysis Phonological Awareness (Blevins, Rosner and Words their Way) Alphabetic Principle (Core Phonics, Words their Way, LETRS Morphological Awareness) Name: _Marcelino____ # of phoneme errors on spelling test: 85% Alphabet Skills: letter 100%, con 100% and vowels 60% Reading and Decoding: CVC 80% Digraphs80% Blends 40% Long Vowels 20% R Controlled 60% Variant 60% Rosner Auditory Analysis: 1st grade Rhyme: Oddity Task: Oral Blending: Oral Segmentation: Phonemic Manipulation: Reading ORF Rate: 4th grade 21 Reading Level: DRA 8 SD Primer ORF Accuracy: 65% Oral Language Vocabulary: 3rd Grade Level Color naming RAN: 3rd grade Site Words: 153/200 Executive Functioning Skills: easily distracted; hyper-focus with interest areas; focus in small group; struggles in math; weak executive functioning Reasoning Skills: struggles with verbal reasoning Other: boy 4th grade ; fun kid, cheerful, lighthearted; likeable and sociable; English; History- mother had same problems; younger brother Vocabulary and Comprehension (DRA/SRI, Core Vocabulary and Critchlaw) Fluency (ORF, Fry and RAN)

Executive Functioning Concerns Root Causes of Reading Difficulty yes Name: _____ Marcelino _________ Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with executive functioning? 1. Prioritize the concerns _a minor oral reasoning concern___ _phonological processing _____ _orthographic processing ________ ______________________________ AT recommendations: Kruzweil 3000; speech to text- word Q Intervention: P. Processing intervention Student has the ability to sustain focus when basic skills are automatic no Reasoning Concerns Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with reasoning ? yes 2. Student is able to learn through various methods (mastery, inquiry) no Basic Reading Phonological Concern Reading Comprehension Concerns Basic Reading Orthographic Concern yes Is there evidence to suggest problems with phonological processing? yes Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with Language Processing ? Is there evidence to suggest problems with orthographic processing? yes 3. no no Create the Treatment Plan no Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with processing speed? Reading Fluency Concerns no yes

Fishbone Analysis Phonological Awareness (Blevins, Rosner and Words their Way) Alphabetic Principle (Core Phonics, Words their Way, LETRS Morphological Awareness) Name: __Salivador ___ Morphology: # of phoneme errors on spelling test: did not take Alphabet Skills: Letter name 19/52 Consonant sounds 16/32 Long Vowel Sounds 0/5 Short Vowel 3/5 Rosner Auditory Analysis: k Rhyme: 1/12 Oddity Task: 8/12 Oral Blending: 3/6 Oral Segmentation: 4/6 Phonemic Manipulation: 0/12 Reading ORF Rate: Reading Level: DRA 1 ORF Accuracy: Oral Language Vocabulary: Color naming RAN: Less than K level Site Words: Reading Vocabulary: Executive Functioning Skills: small group – needs cue to stay on task with complex tasks ; pretty poor Reasoning Skills: verbal- not a lot of opportunity to express himself; average Other: a lot of energy; charismatic; behaviors – Montessori – struggles with letter boxes, couple letter sounds and shut down with writing; 7 years old; immature and behavior in the classroom; English; first grader Vocabulary and Comprehension (DRA/SRI, Core Vocabulary and Critchlaw) Fluency (ORF, Fry and RAN)

Executive Functioning Concerns Root Causes of Reading Difficulty yes Name: _____________________________ Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with executive functioning? 1. Student has the ability to sustain focus when basic skills are automatic Prioritize the concerns ___Executive Functioning_______ ___Processing Speed __________ ___Phonology ____________ ___Orthography ________________ ______________________________ no Reasoning Concerns Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with reasoning ? yes 2. Student is able to learn through various methods (mastery, inquiry) no Basic Reading Phonological Concern Reading Comprehension Concerns Basic Reading Orthographic Concern yes Is there evidence to suggest problems with phonological processing? yes Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with Language Processing ? Is there evidence to suggest problems with orthographic processing? yes 3. no no Create the Treatment Plan no Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with processing speed? Reading Fluency Concerns no yes

Fishbone Analysis Phonological Awareness (Blevins, Rosner and Words their Way) Alphabetic Principle (Core Phonics, Words their Way, LETRS Morphological Awareness) Name: __Joselyn ______ # of phoneme errors on spelling test: 50% Alphabet Skills: 100% Reading and Decoding: 60% for CVC 50% Digraphs 60% Blends 20% Long Vowel 30% Variant 30% r con 0% multisyllable Rosner Auditory Analysis: 2nd grade level Rhyme: 9/12 Oddity Task: 12/12 Oral Blending: 12/12 Oral Segmentation: 24/24 Phonemic Manipulation: 12/12 Reading ORF Rate: 37 wpm Reading Level: DRA 12 ORF Accuracy: 79% Oral Language Vocabulary: 4th grade level Color naming RAN: 5th grade Site Words: 91/100 50/100 Executive Functioning Skills: lacks focus in subject areas she is struggling; like art and music and social studies Reasoning Skills: average reasoning skills; Other: 3rd Grade; social, willing to help and hard worker; Dad is Spanish; No instruction in Spanish; not a Spanish speaker; 2 older brother both in Special Education – decoding comprehension; new to school Vocabulary and Comprehension (DRA/SRI, Core Vocabulary and Critchlaw) Fluency (ORF, Fry and RAN)

Executive Functioning Concerns Root Causes of Reading Difficulty yes Name: __ Joselyn ______ Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with executive functioning? 1. Student has the ability to sustain focus when basic skills are automatic Prioritize the concerns __Basic Reading Phonological ____ __Orthographic Processing ______ ______________________________ no Reasoning Concerns Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with reasoning ? yes 2. Student is able to learn through various methods (mastery, inquiry) no Basic Reading Phonological Concern Reading Comprehension Concerns Basic Reading Orthographic Concern yes Is there evidence to suggest problems with phonological processing? yes Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with Language Processing ? Is there evidence to suggest problems with orthographic processing? yes 3. no no Create the Treatment Plan no Is there evidence to suggest difficulty with processing speed? Reading Fluency Concerns no yes

Literacy Focus Schools

Case Study Diagnostic/ Root Cause Analysis Treatment Plan
Progress Monitoring Evaluation -Informal Measures -20 Minutes -As many people to participate as possible -IEP Driven -Quick -After each 5 hours of treatment -Collaborative -Based on building resources -Fidelity to IEP -All children receive core -Treatment based on the deficit -Check in -Mentoring, Coaching and Collaboration

Near North East Year One
13 E. S. Mostly SPED and SLP Teachers 3rd grade CSAP status of P or PP grew 25% for a total of 43% of Special Education Students were P or PP on CSAP Sustained these levels in year two with less support

West Side Literacy Focus Year Two
Mostly SPED and SLP Teachers Largest ELL Population in the district When doing root cause-introduced the concepts of errors of transfer for ELL 3rd grade CSAP status of P or PP grew 14% for a total of 26% of Special Education Students were P or PP on CSAP

Green Valley Ranch Turn Around School New Leadership New Curriculum

Green Valley Ranch 60 4th and 5th Graders Scoring Unsatisfactory
Screening data indicated 40 needed word level reading 15 needing phonological awareness work 12 needed language 8 needed comprehensive intervention

September to December 2012 Green Valley Ranch Word Level Reading (40)
Language (12) Comprehensive (8) Grapheme Work (25) -Writing Road to Reading 1 hour daily Phoneme Work (15) -Writing Road to Reading with Phonological Awareness work daily Vocabulary and Oral Language work with leveled (LLI) and decodable text (text from the Core) Language! September to December 2012

Green Valley Ranch 48 have returned to the general education classroom
Remaining 12 had a deeper root cause analysis completed 9 will continue intervention that focuses more on multi-syllable word work and morpheme instruction 3 have been referred to special education

How could this be facilitated by school leaders?
What structures need to be in place for the individual unit of analysis to occur? What knowledge does the problem solving team need to be successful at completing an individual unit of analysis? What role does the school leader play in this process? What are the questions school leaders need to ask?

As General Education Teachers…
We must pay attention to the clues and dig a little bit deeper. Reading Writing Math Most reading issues are due to lack of mastery of low level skills -phonological awareness and alphabetic skills -poor fluency is mostly due to poor basic skills (teaching them to read faster doesn’t solve the problem) -comprehension is rarely the issue and strong indication of a learning disability (10%) or ELL Most writing issues are due to lack of mastery of transcription skills (handwriting, keyboarding, spelling and grammar) Second biggest issues is poor mental control -Writing is not simply transcribing what you say Most math issues are due to lack of number sense and non-verbal processing -concept first then automaticity -If reasoning is in place then not a problem with problem solving

Using Root Cause Analysis to Choose Interventions

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Using Root Cause Analysis to Choose Interventions"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Using Root Cause Analysis to Choose Interventions

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Using Root Cause Analysis to Choose Interventions"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback