1. Data Based Decision Making
Measuring Responsiveness to Intervention

2. What is a significant change in performance?
One that results in meaningful change.
One that significantly reduces the gap.
One that meets your goal.

3. What is a non-responder?
Median Split of slop on standardized assessment instruments (e.g. Vellutino, 1996; WRMT)
Normalized Scores (e.g. Torgeson, 2001; 90 or better on WRMT)
Most Lenient
Dual Discrepancy (Speece and Case, 2001; Slope and level = 1sd below mean)
End of year benchmark (e.g. Good, 2001)
Most stringent

4. Dual Discrepancy
Discrepant from peers at data collection point 1 (e.g. fall benchmark)
Discrepancy continues or becomes larger at point 2 (e.g. winter benchmark)
This is referred to a student’s rate of improvement (ROI)

6. State Discrepancy
Be objective. Does it refer to an observable characteristic of behavior?
Be clear. Can others read the discrepancy statement and observe it easily?
Calculate the discrepancy ratio
Include statement of student’s current level of performance.
Include statement of the expected level of performance (e.g., peer data, teacher expectation).

7. Discrepancy Ratios: Elementary Example
Helps to quantify how many times the student’s current level of performance varies from that of his/her peers.
In order to calculate a discrepancy ratio use the following formula:
Peer Behavior
Target Student Behavior
Example:When given a 4th grade probe, Jessica is reading 80 correct words per minute while average 4th grade peers are reading 145 correct words per minute.
Peer Behavior = = x
Target Student Behavior

8. Discrepancy Ratios
Enables team to make decisions about levels of support and resource from the start.
Generally speaking…
A student who is 1.5x discrepant from his/her peers is appropriate for the problem-solving team.
If a student is significantly discrepant from peers, additional problem-solving and intervention resources may be appropriate.
Example: Jessica is 1.81 x discrepant from peers
and MAY benefit from problem solving.

9. Discrepancy Ratios: Secondary Example-Negative Behavior
Helps to quantify how many times the student’s current level of performance varies from that of his/her peers.
In order to calculate a discrepancy ratio for undesirable behavior use the following formula:
Target Student Behavior
Peer Behavior
Example: Jessica has been disruptive 15 times per week while the average 10th grade peer is disruptive 3 times per week.
Target Student Behavior = = x
Peer Behavior

10. Provides a way to evaluate student outcomes and the effectiveness of an intervention to reduce initial performance discrepancies.
Name
Grade
Area
Initial Performance Discrepancy
Follow Up Performance Discrepancy
Rate of Progress
Outcome Decision
Bill 3
Reading
3.5X
2.2X
2.3 WRC per week
Satisfactory Maintain Intervention
Susie 6
Math
1.2X NA
No Severe Problem
Jess 10
Behavior 5X
4.8X
.2x change
Insufficient Progress, Recycle through process

11. What is significant Discrepancy?
1.5 times discrepant
.5 SD
25th percentile
90% probability not passing high stakes testing
criterion based decision making

12. Writing Goals and Objectives

13. Goals/Objectives
What are Instructional Objectives and How are they Used?
A. Behavioral Objectives: Statement of skill that students are expected to know at the end of some period of instruction.
* Method of measurement should also be stated in meaningful observable methods.
* Should state: Performance, condition, criteria and when possible the date.
e.g. Given a worksheet containing 20 3 digit by 2 digit
multiplication problems that require carrying, students will
be able to complete all of them with 90% accuracy within
20 minutes.

14. Goal Setting Based on last three data points Based on split plot
Based on intra-individual performance
(Addition predicting subtraction)
Based on group of students (benchmarking and rate of improvement)
Based on team decision

15. Determining Long range Goal
Multiply number of weeks that you will be monitoring by the criterion (Expected ROI).
Add this number to the median baseline point
Example:
Median baseline point = 35
Number of weeks = 10
Expected rate of growth (based on norms or suggestion)

16. Baseline
Intervention

17. Writing IEP Goals Long range Goal
In ___ (total # weeks) when presented with math problems form (curriculum and grade level) ____ (Student’s name) will perform ____(long range goal) with _____ errors or fewer.

18. Writing IEP Goals Short term objective
Each successive week, when presented with a random selection from _____ (curriculum and grade level) ____ (Student’s name) will perform at an average increase of _____ DCM and no increase in errors.

19. Progress Monitoring

20. How long to implement intervention?
10-15 weeks
Perhaps a quarter system approach?

21. How long before tweaking?
3 data points: Above or below line?
4 Data points: 3 weeks of instruction and 6 points of data collected: Examine 4 most recent points
Trend line: 4 weeks of instruction and 8 data points collected construct trend line
Remember:
Stability
Trend
Level

22. Time to Triage What do you with:
Jason, 8 year old African American male who is 1. 7 x discrepant from grade level peers in math and 1.5 times discrepant from grade level peers in reading? Grades are below average in both subject areas. Jason is at the 40th percentile in reading and math within his classroom.

23. Decision Making Time What do you do with:
Jason, after 10 weeks of Standard Protocol Intervention and his rate of improvement (ROI) is 2wcpm in reading compared to 1.5 wcpm ROI in reading but he is still only at the 40th percentile in reading compared to grade level peers?

24. Time to Triage What do you with:
Jason, 8 year old African American male who is 1. 7 x discrepant from grade level peers in math and 1.5 times discrepant from grade level peers in reading? Grades are below average in both subject areas. Jason is at the 15th percentile in reading and math within his classroom.

25. Decision Making Time What do you do with:
Jason, after 10 weeks of Standard Protocol Intervention and his rate of improvement (ROI) is 1.25 wcpm in reading compared to 2.0 wcpm in reading and he is still only at the 15th percentile in reading compared to grade level peers?

26. Generic Problem Solving Model
Problem Identification
Problem Analysis
Problem Definition
Goal Setting
Intervention Selection
Intervention Implementation
Intervention Evaluation

27. Problem Identification
Problems in general area: (e.g., reading, math, writing, spelling)
Compare to same grade peers
If discrepant from peers then consider problem analysis.

28. Problem Analysis
Probe/assessment to determine basic skills that demonstrate rate and/or accuracy issues
Specificity
Consider RIOT and ICEL and IPF

29. Problem Definition Must contain: Measurable and observable language
(e.g., number problems per minute)
Specify conditions (e.g. worksheet, verbal?)
Specify level
(e.g., percent, rate, compared to peers)
Specify date

30. Writing a Hypothesis Provide the discrepancy statement
Add because… at the end of the discrepancy statement and insert your hypothesis.
The hypothesis should be specific, observable, and measurable.
Example:
Beth is on-task for 35% of intervals while peers are on-task 87% of intervals during a 20-minute observation during direct instruction in Math class, because she is escaping the Math work which is above her instructional level.

31. Goal Setting Often overlooked Should be based on problem definition
May include norms, teacher input
Should specify date deadline
Should specify level cutoff
Should be done before considering interventions

32. Intervention Selection
Should be linked to the assessment
Likely to focus on basic learning/behavioral principles
Should have empirical support and/or be strongly influenced by research
Keystone intervention, effort, time, difficulty, acceptability

33. Intervention Implementation
Integrity is a key issue

34. Intervention Evaluation
Did you meet your goal?
*If yes, then intervention effective
*If no, then not educationally significant
Return to intervention selection
Frequent progress monitoring is critical

35. A Systems-Level Problem
A team at‘Cardinal School’ noticed that approximately twice the number of referrals for Special Education consideration for difficulty in reading had come from the 3rd grade during the first four months of school than in the prior three years.

36. Step 1: Problem Identification
Question: What is the discrepancy between what is expected and what is occurring?
A. List problem behavior(s) and prioritize.
B. Collect baseline data on primary area of concern (target student and peer).
Record Review
Interview
Observation
Testing
C. State discrepancy between target student performance and peer performance.

37. sampling of students
all students included

38. Problem Identification Datax P l o t S p l i t B y : G r a d e 1 6 1 4 1 2 1 F I R S T 8 S E C O N D T H I R D 6 4 2
Winter WRC
Grade 1
Winter WRC
Grade 2
Winter WRC
Grade 3

39. Problem Identification
Statement of Discrepancy: 15 of the 3rd grade students fall below the 25th percentile in reading fluency. Of those, 12 are also not making adequate rates of progress.

40. Through the Years: Class of 2012
Problem Analysis
Through the Years: Class of 2012 B o x P l o t S p l i t B y : G r a d e 1 6 1 4 1 2 1 F I R S T 8 S E C O N D T H I R D 6 4 2
Winter WRC
Grade 1
Winter WRC
Grade 2
Winter WRC
Grade 3

41. Current Grade Level Data
Problem Analysis
Current Grade Level Data B o x P l o t S p l i t B y : G r a d e 1 6 1 4 1 2 1 F I R S T 8 S E C O N D T H I R D 6 4 2
Winter WRC
Grade 1
Winter WRC
Grade 2
Winter WRC
Grade 3

42. Investigate WHY the problem exists:
Did the referred students exhibit reading difficulties before the 3rd-grade?
Yes, review of CBM data indicate that the referred students were roughly the same lowest performing group in 1st and 2nd grade.
Do the current 1st and 2nd graders show a similar pattern?
Yes, CBM data from the current year indicate groups of 1st and 2nd grade students not making adequate rates of progress.

43. Problem Analysis
A significant portion of 3rd grade students are not making adequate rates of progress in reading BECAUSE…..
Not all students established satisfactory reading trajectories during Kindergarten and 1st grade BECAUSE?

44. Kindergarten Instructional Planning Form
Activity
Materials
Arrangement
Time
Motivational
Strategy
Language Exposure
Books
Whole Group
Teacher Led
50 min / wk
Praise for attention
Letter Naming
Manipulatives
Worksheets
Small Group
Independent
30 min / wk
Reminding
Independent Reading
Individual
20 min / wk
Praise for appropriate behavior

45. First Grade Instructional Planning Form
Activity
Materials
Arrangement
Time
Motivational
Strategy
Silent Reading
Books
Independent
10 min / day
Praise for appropriate behavior
Choral Reading
1st Grade Teacher
Whole Group
Verbal Feedback
Word Walls
Word Cards
Praise for participating

46. A significant proportion of 3rd grade students are not making adequate rates of progress in reading BECAUSE……..
Not all students established satisfactory reading trajectories during Kindergarten & 1st grade BECAUSE…….
Current early elementary reading curriculum places little focus on systematic pre-literacy skill instruction (i.e. phonemic awareness and phonics).
To change trajectories, we must intervene systematically, strategically, and early.