1. OrRTI – Oregon’s Response to Intervention Initiative Jennifer Doolittle Oregon Department of Education June 21, 2006

2. Objectives Basic understanding of RTI Description of Oregon’s RTI Initiative Basics regarding special education eligibility using RTI

3. Resources ODE’s RTI Web page: http://www.ode.state.or.us/initiatives/idea/r ti.aspx (Please read the Technical Assistance paper linked from this page) http://www.ode.state.or.us/initiatives/idea/r ti.aspx National Center on Progress Monitoring: www.studentprogress.org www.studentprogress.org Tigard Tualatin SD: http://www.ttsd.k12.or.us/district/student- services/oregons-response-to-intervention http://www.ttsd.k12.or.us/district/student- services/oregons-response-to-intervention

4. Implementing RTI in Tigard- Tualatin School District OSEP Leadership Conference March 30, 2005 Carol Sadler, Ph.D. 503-431-4117 - csadler@ttsd.k12.or.us

5. Response to Intervention A Case Illustration Lowell Ernst Pella Community School District pchslee@pella.k12.ia.us Brian Miller Pella Community School District pcjebgm@pella.k12.ia.us Wendy Robinson Heartland Area Education Agency wrobinson@aea11.k12.ia.us W. David Tilly Heartland Area Education Agency dtilly@aea11.k12.ia.us Presentation provided to the National Association of State Directors of Special Education Satellite Series. November 9, 2005

6. Definition RtI is the practice of providing high-quality instruction and intervention matched to student need, monitoring progress frequently to make decisions about change in instruction or goals and applying child response data to important educational decisions. (NASDSE, 2005) IDEA 2004 provides for the use of RtI as part of the process to determine eligibility for learning disabilities.

7. Consensus Report – LD Summit 2001 IQ/Achievement Discrepancy is neither necessary nor sufficient for identifying individuals with SLD (specific learning disabilities). IQ tests do not need to be given in most evaluations of children with SLD. There should be alternate ways to identify individuals with SLD in addition to achievement testing, history, and observations of the child.

8. Consensus Report – Alternatives 2001 Response to quality intervention is the most promising method of alternate identification and can both promote effective practices in schools and help to close the gap between identification and treatment. Any effort to scale up response to intervention should be based on problem solving models that use progress monitoring to gauge the intensity of intervention in relation to the student’s response to intervention. Problem solving models have been shown to be effective in public school settings and in research.

9. Vocabulary – Convergence of Thinking Problem Solving Model (PS): Proposed, implemented and refined since the early ’80s in special education as an alternative system to the traditional Refer-Test-Place system. It encompasses both general education and special education systems. Initially was individual student focused. Response To Intervention (RTI) – Also called a Standard Treatment Approach (STA), Resistance to Intervention and Responsiveness to Intervention: Being proposed by researchers across the country as an alternative method for identifying individuals with Learning Disabilities. An opportunity to link IDEA thinking with NCLB thinking. School-Wide Model (SWM): An integrative way of thinking logically and rationally about meeting All children’s needs in a school. It represents a promising way for schools to comprehensively draw together and allocate their resources to meet children’s educational needs. It is a “smart” system.

10. Why Use a Response to Intervention Approach? Model is not just conceptual but practical Multidisciplinary... it actually increases teaming Preventative / early intervention focus Increases amount of services to children Increases parental awareness and involvement

11. Frees staff to make professional decisions Process is developmental... requires flexibility Limited only by teams in ability to generate solutions Emphasis is always on least-restrictive environment Emphasis is on exit as much as entrance Match with our beliefs about education for all kids...

12. To Get There in Practice: We Need to Do Three Things 1.Adopt “Smart” system structures 2.Import the “Scientific Method” into practice 3.Use scientifically validated teaching practices to the greatest degree possible

13. Academic SystemsBehavioral Systems 5-10% 10-15% Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based High Intensity Of longer duration Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response 75-85% Universal Interventions All students Preventive, proactive Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive Thing 1: Adopt Smart System Structures School-Wide Systems for Student Success

14. Thing 2: Import the Scientific Method Into Practice: The Problem Solving Process Implement Plan (Treatment Integrity) Carry out the intervention Evaluate (Progress Monitoring Assessment) Did our plan work? Define the Problem (Screening and Diagnostic Assessments) What is the problem and why is it happening? Develop a Plan (Goal Setting and Planning) What are we going to do ?

15. Thing 2: In RTI, We Differentiate Assessment for the Purpose of Differentiating Instruction Def: Assessment, is the process of collecting information for the purpose of making decisions or answering questions (Salvia & Ysseldyke, 1991) Different kinds of assessment data are needed for different decisions within the system 3 Major Types of Decisions/Assessments

16. Thing 2: Three Primary Types of Assessment 1.Screening Assessments: – assessments used to determine if additional investigation is warranted 2.Diagnostic Assessments: Assessment conducted at any time during the school year when more in-depth analysis of a student’s strengths and weaknesses is needed to guide instruction (Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, 2003) 3.Progress Monitoring Assessments: Assessment conducted a minimum of three times a year or on a routine basis (i.e., weekly, monthly, or quarterly) using comparable and multiple test forms to (a) estimate rates of student improvement, (b) identify children who are not demonstrating adequate progress and therefore require additional or different forms of instruction, and/or (c) compare the efficacy of different forms of instruction for struggling readers and thereby design more effective, individualized instructional programs for those at-risk learners. (adapted from Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement, 2003)

17. Core Principles of Response to Intervention (RtI) We can effectively serve all children Intervene early Use a multi-tier model of service delivery Use a problem-solving method to make decisions within a multi-tier model

18. Core Principles of Response to Intervention (RtI) Use research-based scientifically validated interventions/instruction Monitor student progress to inform instruction Use data to make decisions. A DATA-BASED decision regarding student response to intervention is central to RtI practice Use assessment for screening, diagnostic and progress monitoring purposes

19. What It Takes Shifts in Thinking Professional Development Technical Assistance Administrative and Policy Support

20. Professional Development Leadership (policy makers and superintendents) Administrative groups (district and building level) Direct service groups (teachers and other instructional staff) Related service groups (consultants, school psychologists, social workers, speech pathologists, etc.) Parents

21. Technical Support Data management system Inventory of resources (financial and personnel) Mentoring and coaching

22. Administrative and Policy Support Organizing and implementing decisions around curriculum, instruction and use of resources based on student performance data at all levels Administrative leadership and support of data- based decision making Policy to support use of RtI and problem solving to meet the needs of full range of learners within a system

23. Academic SystemsBehavioral Systems 5-10% 10-15% Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based High Intensity Of longer duration Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response 75-85% Universal Interventions All students Preventive, proactive Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive Thing 1: Adopt Smart System Structures School-Wide Systems for Student Success

24. Classroom (Core) Instruction Is the core material matched to your population? How much consistency and integrity of delivery do you have between teachers? How consistent are your evaluation instruments? Do they furnish you with the data you need to make decisions on moving to the next level? What strategies and tools do your teachers have to remediate in the classroom?

25. Supplemental Services Title One teachers deliver specialized reading instruction and use progress monitoring to measure the effectiveness of the intervention. –Phonemic Awareness –Phonics/Decoding skills –Fluency/Accuracy building –Vocabulary building –Comprehension skills

26. Intensive Services Layering of instruction –General education extended team Individualized interventions based on further problem analysis of student needs. –Special education services IEP development

27. Daisy participates in the general curriculum EBIS Team reviews screening data and places Daisy in group intervention Daisy isn’t doing well Daisy improves Daisy improves EBIS Team designs individual intervention Resumes general program Daisy doesn’t improve Daisy doesn’t improve Special Education referral is initiated Daisy may recycle Intervention is intense and LD is suspected Improvement is good and other factors are suspected as cause

28. One Model of Teaming Academic TEAM Meets weekly Plans and implements school-wide reading/academic Monitors all students in small group and individual interventions Makes referrals to special education GRADE LEVEL TEAMS Meet monthly Plan and implement small group reading/academic interventions EBS TEAM Meets Twice Monthly Plans and implements school-wide and small group behavior supports

29. Tigard Tualatin Findings Case Study Accomplishments –Integrated, collaborative teams, district and schools –Generic service delivery –Identify ALL students and provide interventions –Reducing “instructionally disabled” –Whole child approach –Research-based programs and practices Trends in Identification Rates, earlier

30. Or-RTI 2005-2006 Contractor: Tigard-Tualatin SD 5 districts received 4 days of training at TT Prerequisites 2 days of training on site Continued technical assistance in 2006-2007 Created district implementation plans 9 districts received $5,000 grants Used for training, planning, buying supplementary curricula, and building progress monitoring database Conferences to build readiness

31. 2006-2007 Or-RTI New districts –Training will be similar to 2005-2006 Continue working with sustaining districts Conferences

32. Vision for Oregon Support as many districts as possible in their work toward readiness or in implementing RTI Ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are in place for all districts using RTI to determine eligibility of students with learning disabilities

33. Dual Discrepancy –Low skills (The easier part) –Slow progress despite intensive intervention (The trickier part)

34. Are the Student’s Skills Low? Determine parameters –Likely 20 th -30 th percentile Maintain consistency –School to school –Grade to grade –Child to child

35. Is the Intervention Intensive? Scientific, research-based (IDEA 2004) Sufficient frequency and duration Implemented with fidelity

36. Is There Progress? “How much progress is enough?” –Context is Key Typical growth

37. Evaluation Planning – Step #1 What you know –Individual Problem Solving Worksheet –Student Intervention Profile –Progress Monitoring Data

38. Evaluation Planning – Step #2 What you need to know –General Requirements –LD Eligibility Statement –Filling in the holes

39. Consideration: Evaluation Process Evaluation planning; to Assess all areas; to Identify special education and related services needs; within the Evaluation timeline; using Assessments as designed

40. Important Idea: RTI is one component of a comprehensive evaluation.

41. Susie: Is she resistant to instruction? 2 nd Grader Fall: ORF 22 Winter: ORF 55 Gain: 2.37 words/week Typical gain: 1.5 words/week Core program + SMART volunteer + Read Naturally 2 times per week +Phonics for Reading and Read Naturally 5 times per week

42. Elliot: Is he resistant to instruction? 25th th percentile on ORF Remains at 25 th percentile Core program 20 minutes/day additional practice 40 minutes/day explicit instruction and guided practice

43. What About…? English Language Learners –Most useful approach –Interventions in language of core program –Cohort comparison critical –Review Section 6 on LD Eligibility Report Checklist

44. What About…? Secondary Students –Problem Solving Approach Similar thinking…weight of progress vs. weight of instructional support

45. Eligibility Decision Making –It comes down to the balance. How does the “weight” of the intervention compare to the “weight” of progress?