2. How Can Special Educators Best Support Response-To-Intervention Practices Within the General Educational Setting? A Speech Language Pathologist’s Perspective By: Eve Mills M.A. CCC-SLP

3. What Does the Research Say? Koustsoftas, Harmon and Gray, from Arizona State University, Tempe, evaluated the effectiveness of a Tier 2 intervention designed to increase the phonemic awareness skills of at risk preschoolers in their 2009 study: The Effect of Tier 2 Intervention for Phonemic Awareness in a Response-To- Intervention Model in Low-Income Preschool Classrooms

4. Method  34 preschoolers participated in small groups, 2 times a week for 6 weeks, for beginning sound awareness.  Lessons were provided by trained teachers and SLPs from scripted materials.  Multiple baseline across participants treatment design

5. Results  Intervention was successful in improving beginning sounds awareness skills in 71% of the children.  Beginning sound awareness skills of children studies were tested in the fall of kindergarten. Results indicated smaller percentages of children from Tier 2 preschool intervention groups were classified as being at risk than in the school district as a whole.

6. Conclusion  Over a relatively short period of time, at risk preschoolers’ phonemic awareness skills were increased through small-group Tier 2 intervention provided by qualified professionals.  Research supports Tier 2 interventions can positively impact the future reading skills of children who are at risk for later reading difficulties.

7. Limitations  Special education eligibility was unknown for students participating in the study- students may have been receiving interventions in addition to Tier 2 groups.  Standardized measures were not used.  Small sample size

8. Speech Language Pathologists’ Involvement in Responsive-To- Intervention Activities: A Complement to Curriculum-Relevant Practice By: Maureen Staskowski PhD CCC-SLP and Elizabeth Rivera MA, CCC-SLP Best Practice Article Review

9. SLPs’ Roles are Changing  Shift from traditional medically-based model Diagnosis-standardized testing and etiology based Treat-pull-out sessions regularly scheduled and 1:1 Cure-clinic within the school design with goals separate from the curriculum

10. Curriculum-Relevant Model  Treatment driven by the idea that language and speech abilities have a significant impact on school success-both academic and social Dynamic assessments not solely limited to standardized testing Goals based upon functional and academic needs within curricular context Services delivered in classroom, or therapy rooms and with groups of peers.

11. RTI Model Presents new opportunities for SLPs to extend curriculum- relevant practices to students with and without communication disorders.

12. Three-Tiered Model of RTI  Tier I  includes all students taking part in the general education curriculum.  Tier II  Students identified as being at risk for reading failure  Supplemental interventions  Tier III  Students who have not responded to Tier I or Tier II interventions and need a special education referral

13. SLPs’ Involvement in RTI Interventions Tier I Work at the school building to district level to plan professional development and group instruction for all, focused on language and literacy, whether or not the classroom includes students “on the caseload”. Word decoding Phonemic awareness Social skills for peer interactions Reading comprehension Note and test-taking strategies

14. Tier II  Work with school support team members to monitor progress of students identified as at- risk.  Help teachers design and implement specialized instruction for those who are not responding to general classroom instruction, including small group instruction in phonics, phonemic awareness, word-decoding, and reading comprehension. SLPs’ Involvement in RTI Interventions

15. Tier III  Before any special education services are recommended, it should be determined that the student has difficulty in either Tier I or Tier II and in some cases, even in intensive Tier III instruction.

16. Response-To-Intervention: SLPs as Linchpins in Secondary Schools By: Barbard Ehren EdD CCC-SLP Best Practice Article Review

17. RTI at the Secondary Level  Most conversations about RTI only center upon approaches with younger children.  SLPs are uniquely qualified to assist with literacy practices at the secondary level based upon training in literacy.

18. Ehren, (2009) lists Seven Steps to Success for the implementation of RTI Initiatives at the Secondary Level

19. STEP 1 START SMALL Begin with and continue educating other staff about why SLPs are involved. Observe general education classrooms, especially Language Arts. Work with small groups of general education students first and ease into co-teaching. Review cumulative files to identify students who are “at-risk”.

20. STEP 2 SELF EDUCATE  Become proficient in all aspects of literacy as well as grade-level academic standards.  Know specific content vocabulary and how it is being taught.  Become involved in school-wide professional development regarding literacy.

21. STEP 3 VOLUNTEER YOUR SKILLS & SERVICES  Ask questions and learn how you can integrate your skills and services into the curriculum.  Look at how homework, tests, quizzes, and contents are being presented, and how they can be adjusted for struggling students.  Ask to sit in on grade level meetings, department meetings etc.

22. STEP 4 DEVELOP A GAME PLAN  Do this for the purposes of time frames, staying on task, and communicating better with staff.  Gain administrative support for the changes you are proposing before presenting them to staff.

23. STEP 5 HAVE REGULAR CONTACT WITH TEACHERS AND ADMINISTRATORS  Develop a core group of staff members to help determine in a timely manner intervention needs and student progress.

24. STEP 6 CREATE A FLEXABLE DAILY SCHEDULE  One option is to change your schedule every nine weeks so that you can be available for classrooms on a rotating basis.  Be open to changing your schedule based upon student need.  Create new definition of “workload”  Refrain from conceptualizing RTI as “adding-on” to existing caseload.  Eliminate “head counting” as caseload approach

25. STEP 7 CULTIVATE BUILDING AND DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT  Commitment to SLPs’ role by administrators is key to the success of this model.

26. How does all the information fit together?  No one magic formula for becoming involved in RTI initiatives as each school presents unique challenges.  Research clearly defines, targeting students identified as “at-risk” for future literacy failure and providing appropriate, sound, and consistent interventions shows promising evidence for literacy acquisition at all skill and grade levels (Koutsoftas, Harmon, & Gray, 2009;Staskowski & Rivera, 2005; Ehren, 2009).

27. What am I doing?  Administrative support gained  Educating parents on service delivery models  SLP staff buy-in  RTI summer study group  Member of Student Support Team-Elementary Level  Using Grade Level Expectations to from IEP goals and objectives  Taking small groups of kindergarteners weekly-initial sound fluency  Enrolled to take Writers Workshop trainings next year  Gaining administrative support at the building levels  Servicing students in classroom the majority of the time as appropriate  General and special education staff buy-in for role changes of SLPs  Professional development for staff on support SLPs can provide.  Member of Student Support Team- Secondary  Increase dynamic assessment practices into MET evaluations.  Increase small group Tier II numbers with students not on caseload.  Assist in general education classroom with Writers Workshop weekly. What will I do?

28. References Ehren, Barbara J. (2009, May 5). Response-to-intervention: SLPs as linchpins in secondary schools. The ASHA Leader American Speech-Language Hearing Association, 14, 10-13. Koutsoftas, Anthony D., Harmon, Mary Towle., & Gray, Shelley. (2009). The effect of tier 2 intervention for phonemic awareness in a response-to- intervention model in low-income preschool classrooms. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 116-130. National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Incorporated & Council of Administrators of Special Education. (2006). NASDSE and CASE White Paper on RTI [White Paper]. Retrieved from http://www.nasdse. org/Projects/ResponToInterventionRtIProject/tabid/411/Default.aspx Staskowski, M. & Rivera, E.A. (2005). Speech-language pathologists’ involvement in responsiveness to intervention activities: a complement to curriculum- relevant practice. Topics in Language Disorders, 25, 132-147.