1. Improving Results for All: The Role of Intensive Intervention in Federal Education Policy Allison Gandhi, Ed.D., National Center on Intensive Intervention Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D., University of Texas–Austin Lee Kern, Ph.D., Lehigh University Larry Wexler, Ed.D., U.S. Office of Special Education Programs April 9, 2015

2. 2 Results-Driven Accountability: Vision All components of an accountability system will be aligned in a manner that best support states in improving results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities and their families. Shift from Compliance to Results + Compliance Slide adapted from: OSEP Slides to Explain Results Driven Accountability (RDA) Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/rda/index.html

3. 3 State Systemic Improvement Plan Year 1—FFY 2013 Delivered by April 2015 Year 2—FFY 2014 Delivered by Feb. 2016 Years 3 – 6—FFY 2015 – 18 Feb. 2017 – Feb. 2020 Phase I AnalysisPhase II PlanPhase III Evaluation  Data analysis  Infrastructure analysis  State-identified measureable result  Coherent improvement strategies  Theory of action  Multiyear plan addressing: Infrastructure development Support early intervening services program and local education agencies in implementing evidence- based practices Evaluation plan  Reporting on progress including: Results of ongoing evaluation Extent of progress  Revisions to the State Performance Plan Slide from: OSEP Slides to Explain Results Driven Accountability (RDA) Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/rda/index.html

4. 4 State-identified Measurable Result(s)  State-identified Measurable Result(s) (SiMR) A child-level (or family-level, for Part C) outcome Not a process or system result May be a single result or a cluster of related results  Identified based on analysis of data

5. 5 On What Are States Focusing? In a May 2014 National Association of State Directors of Special Education survey of state education agencies (32 respondents), states shared their potential focus areas. These included the following: Part B  Approximately 21 states identified reading.  Approximately 9 states identified high school graduation.  Approximately six states identified mathematics.  Three identified preschool outcomes.  Two identified other outcomes. Part C  Approximately 18 states identified social/emotional outcomes.  Seven identified outcomes— knowledge and skills.  Approximately six identified outcomes—unspecified.  Approximately four identified parent/family outcomes.  One identified other.

6. 6 Why Is This Important?  Meeting SiMR goals will require a focus on improving instruction.  States will be in need of support on how to provide intensive intervention for the kids who need it the most, including: Evidence-based intervention strategies Overcoming implementation barriers Making connections to other state, district, and school initiatives

7. 7 Intensive Intervention Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D. University of Texas, Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk

8. 8 Goals  Participants will understand: How intensive intervention supports access to the Common Core State Standards How to intensify instruction within a response to intervention framework How to provide deeper learning opportunities for students with learning disabilities

9. 9 What Is Deeper Learning?  “…the process through which an individual becomes capable of taking what was learned in one situation and applying it to new situations (i.e., transfer).” – National Research Council, 2012, p. 4

10. 10 Postsecondary Success Depends on Deeper Learning in K–12  Federal laws (No Child Left Behind, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) have increased the focus on accountability. Students with disabilities are included in assessment and data reports, bringing the spotlight onto the need to improve learning outcomes for this population.

11. 11 What Do Teachers Do to Make Deeper Learning Accessible for Students With Disabilities?  Most common suggestion: “Differentiate instruction for each learner.”  Sounds like good advice, but…  “the actual implementation is enough to physically and psychologically exhaust even the most capable and motivated teachers.”

12. 12 Our Best Thinking on Making Deeper Learning Accessible  Though learning challenges manifest across subject areas, it is important to focus on developing students’ BASIC skills (reading, writing, mathematics).  However, do not limit instruction to ONLY these skills. Students need rich opportunities to learn content.

13. 13

14. 14 Intensive Intervention What is it?

15. 15 How does intensive intervention relate to the data-based individualization (DBI) process and the Common Core? Intensification Evidence

16. 16 Intensive Intervention  Individualized based on student needs  More intense, often with substantively different content and pedagogy  More frequent and precise progress monitoring  It is not instruction in core content but supports students’ access to content by focusing on foundational, underlying skills (e.g., a student cannot access science text without the ability to read the words).

17. 17 What Can We Learn From Research About Intensive Intervention?  Little empirical research demonstrates specific effective intervention programs for the lowest 3 percent to 5 percent of readers.  Intervention practices are typically based on expert recommendations from a body of research.  Monitoring progress is essential to determine impact and intensity required for individual students.

18. 18 More information  For more information on intensifying intervention, see National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) webinar, “So What Do I Do Now? Strategies for Intensifying Intervention When Standard Approaches Don’t Work”: http://www.intensiveintervention.org/video-resource/so- what-do-i-do-now-strategies-intensifying-intervention- when-standard-approaches-d-0 http://www.intensiveintervention.org/video-resource/so- what-do-i-do-now-strategies-intensifying-intervention- when-standard-approaches-d-0

19. 19 How NCII’s Approach to Intensive Intervention for Behavior Aligns With Recent Federal Initiatives Lee Kern, Ph.D. Lehigh University

20. 20

21. 21 Guiding Principles “No school can be a great school—and ultimately prepare all students for success—if it is not first a safe school.” – U.S. Department of Education (2014)

22. 22 NCII Approach to Behavior Intervention Tiered Intervention – Tier 1—Universal – Tier 2—Targeted – Tier 2—Intensified – Tier 3—Function-based individualized support Data-Based Individualization – Ongoing progress monitoring – Data-based decision making

23. 23 Tiered Intervention  Tier 1 Schoolwide rules  Tier 2 Targeted intervention for nonresponders – Check In Check Out (CICO) – Social skills instruction  Tier 2 Intensified Modified Tier 2 based on individual data – CICO with frequent monitoring  Tier 3 Functional assessment-based intervention

24. 24 Three Guiding Principles for Improving School Climate and Discipline 1.Climate and Prevention 2.Clear, Appropriate, and Consistent Expectations and Consequences 3.Equity and Continuous Improvement

25. 25 Principle 1: Climate and Prevention  Schools that foster positive school climates can help to engage all students in learning by preventing problem behaviors and intervening effectively to support struggling and at-risk students.

26. 26 Climate and Prevention: Action Steps Action StepNCII Protocol Prioritize the use of evidence- based prevention strategies, such as tiered supports. Tiered approach to intervention Promote social and emotional learning. (“[I]ntegrate into tiered support.”) Instruction on expectations Tier 2 and 3 social skills for nonresponders Provide regular training and supports to all school personnel. Instruction for all staff Expertise at Tiers 2 and 3

27. 27 Principle 2: Expectations and Consequences  Schools that have discipline policies or codes of conduct with clear, appropriate, and consistently applied expectations and consequences will help students improve behavior, increase engagement, and boost achievement.

28. 28 Expectations and Consequences: Action Steps Action StepNCII Protocol Set high expectations for behavior and adopt an instructional approach to discipline. (“[R]eteach behavioral expectations and help students develop new behavior skills.”) Instructional approach at all tiers Tier 1—expectations Tier 2—small group Tier 3—multicomponent support with alternative behavioral strategies Involve families, students, and school personnel, and communicate regularly and clearly. Support teams Regular communication about progress (e.g., CICO)

29. 29 Expectations and Consequences: Action Steps Action StepNCII Protocol Ensure that clear, developmentally appropriate, and proportional consequences apply for misbehavior. (“[B]ase disciplinary penalties on specific and objective criteria whenever possible” and “written policies in…language the reader can understand, sanctions imposed for specific offenses, and opportunities to provide feedback to ensure common understanding.”) Clear expectations, stated positively in developmentally appropriate simple language Specific guidelines for behavioral infractions and consequences

30. 30 Expectations and Consequences: Action Steps Action StepNCII Protocol Create policies that include appropriate procedures for students with disabilities and due process for all students. (“[C]omply with the federal and state laws that provide special requirements for the discipline of students with disabilities.”) Tier 3 intervention - Individualized - Linked to assessment information Progress monitoring

31. 31 Expectations and Consequences: Action Steps Action StepNCII Protocol Remove students from the classroom only as a last resort, ensure that alternative settings provide academic instruction, and return students to class as soon as possible. (“Ensure that discipline policies emphasize constructive interventions, such as behavioral instruction and tiered supports to keep students in the classroom.”) Tiered system of support Intervention focus on instruction

32. 32 Principle 3: Equity and Continuous Improvement  Schools that build staff capacity and continuously evaluate the school’s discipline policies and practices are more likely to ensure fairness and equity and promote achievement for all students.

33. 33 Equity and Continuous Improvement: Action Steps Action StepNCII Protocol Train all school staff to apply school discipline policies and practices in a fair and equitable manner. (“Ensure fairness and equity to all students.” “Educators and other school personnel need to be equipped with knowledge and skills to prevent and address conflicts, meet the behavioral needs of diverse students, and fairly and equitably apply discipline policies and practices. Staff should also be equipped to apply discipline using individualized approaches….”) Staff training Individualized approach to intervention

34. 34 Equity and Continuous Improvement: Action Steps Action StepNCII Protocol Use proactive, data-driven, and continuous efforts, including gathering feedback from families, students, teachers, and school personnel to prevent, identify, reduce, and eliminate discriminatory discipline and unintended consequences. (“Train all school staff to apply school discipline policies and practices in a fair and equitable manner”; “Recordkeeping system…disaggregated”; “establish procedures for regular and frequent review.”) Ongoing data collection Systems for data collection designed to easily disaggregate data All decision making based on data

35. 35 Why Focus on Intensive Intervention? Larry Wexler, Ed.D. U.S. Office of Special Education Programs

36. 36 Federal Perspective  IDEA is an Individual Entitlement  Challenge of Minimal responders to E-B Instruction  Low incidence: Traditional Definition  Low incidence is a high priority  Academics Behavior  Redefined Low Incidence to include …persistent and severe learning and behavioral problems that need the most intensive individualized supports

37. 37 Federal Investments: Intensive Intervention  National Center on Intensive Intervention  Individual Doctoral Training Grants  Consortia Doctoral Training Grant  Masters Level Teacher Training

38. 38 Disclaimer This presentation was produced under the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or polices of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this website is intended or should be inferred.

39. 39 References  National Research Council. (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills, J.W. Pellegrino and M.L. Hilton, Editors. Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.  U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Guiding principles: A resource guide for improving school climate and discipline. Washington, DC: Author.

40. 40 National Center on Intensive Intervention 1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NW Washington, DC 20007-3835 866-577-5787 www.intensiveintervention.org Email:ncii@air.orgncii@air.org Twitter: @TheNCII