1. DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING EFFECTIVE K-5 RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION PROGRAMS Kate Esposito, Ph.D. Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

2.  It has become increasingly apparent to anyone who keeps up with "what's hot and what's not" in the education community that Response to Intervention (RTI) is on the move (Horowitz, 2007)

3. Controversy exists  “Response to Intervention is emerging nationally as an effective strategy to support every student.” (O’Connell, 2008)

4.  Does RTI delay identification?  How are at -risk students identified?  What are most effective interventions/preventions?  How is responsiveness to instruction defined?  How long should interventions last? RTI4success.org;US Office of Special Education

5.  Response to intervention is defined as the change in behavior or performance as a function of an intervention.  (Gresham, 1991)

6. EBIS Prevention and Planning Models Intensity- Interventions & Progress Monitoring EBIS/RTI Planning Model

7. RTI is…  Multi-tiered prevention system  Integration of ongoing assessment & intervention  Goals are:  Maximize student achievement  Reduce behavior problems

8.  Used to:  Identify at-risk learners  Monitor progression of individual students  Change course of action based on response  Identify specific learning disabilities Haager, Klingner & Vaughn, 2007;RTI4success.org, 2008

9. It’s not just about identification anymore

11. Response to instruction and intervention  “a general education approach of high quality instruction, early intervention and prevention and behavioral strategies (CDE, 2008).”

12. core components of RTI  High Quality Classroom Instruction  Research-based instruction  Universal Screening  Continuous Progress Monitoring  Research-based interventions  Progress monitoring during instruction and intervention  Fidelity of program implementation  Staff development and collaboration  Parent involvement  SLD determination

13. What does it really look like???

14. RTI Implementation  Set explicit guidelines for assessing student progress  Process to ensure programs/interventions are implemented with fidelity and consistency across curriculum  Model schools use teams to monitor progress  Start of year (school screening)  Meet monthly to monitor students receiving tier1 interventions  Monthly for tier 2 interventions

15. Tier 1  General Ed strategies  Curriculum driven thru state standards  Informal individual intervention.  D.I.  Primary intervention pathway  Constant monitoring “All children can learn.”

16. Movement into Tier 2  Who isn ’ t this working for ?

17. Moving from Level 1 to Level 2  Evidence based  Process driven

18. Tier 2 Support  Small group instruction  Intensity increased  Need based  Indiv. progress monitored more freq. (1 x/monthly)  State adopted supplemental programs

19. Process driven???  Ongoing collaborative  Data Driven Process  Determine what secondary intervention might look like Team Meetings

20. Is the intervention working?  Yes…discontinue intervention  Yes…but continue intervention  No…revise existing intervention  No…change to individualized approach

21. Moving from Tier 2 to Tier 3 or Referral  Individualized intervention  Parent involvement  Separate classroom (?)  Time line implemented  Targets specific skill deficits identified in Tiers 1 & 2  Target unmet= comprehensive evaluation and potential placement

22. Tier 3 = SpEd???????  RTI Teams determine special education referral.  After individualized intervention has proven to be unsuccessful

23.  RTI is cited in IDEIA (2004) in relation to determination of SLD.  RTI is not mandated, rather it is an option

24. RTI as Identification Tool  Problem based approach  Reduction of overrepresentation of minority students  Timely systematic delivery of interventions

25. Paradigmatic Shift  Emphasizes quality instruction  Progress monitoring  Questioning in teams  Necessitates collaboration  Student centered focus  Deficit model  Assumes something is “wrong” and the student needs to be “fixed”  Limits collaboration  Limits interactional understanding RTI ModelTraditional Model

26. Model RTI Teams  General education teacher  Educational Specialists  Support Staff  Reading specialists  Behavioral specialists  School Psychologists  Administrators  Parents  Student

28. Power of Collaboration  Team based interventions  Co-teaching  Team Teaching  PLC’s  SLC’s

29. Fundamentals of PLC…  What do we want each student to learn?  How will we know when each student has learned it?  How will we respond when a student encounters challenge?

30. For your consideration…  Shared conference periods  Administrative buy-in & support  Professional development provided  Support