1. Vision: Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve…every day. Oregon Response to Intervention Vision: Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve…every day. Using RTI for Determining Initial SLD Eligibility: Referral, Evaluation, and Instructional Planning Nicole Kaye Sally Helton OrRTI Spring Conference April 21 nd, 2015

2. Targets Why RTI for SLD Decision Making How the referral process works What are the key questions we need to answer in a comprehensive evaluation for SLD?

3. Data-Based Decision Making with Decision Rules Training Coaching Fidelity Training Coaching Fidelity Standards of Practice Standards of Practice Culture Leadership Teaming/Data- Based Decision Making Professional Learning & Support RTI Essential Components Core Screening Interventions Progress Monitoring SLD Decision Making

4. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org IDEA Established and Supports the use of RTI for SLD Federal Regulations: Must not require the use of a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and 34 CFR 300.8(c)(10); Must permit the use of a process based on the child's response to scientific, research-based intervention; and May permit the use of other alternative research-based procedures for determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, as defined in 34 CFR 300.8(c)(10).

5. Rationale: RTI IS the Intent of the New IDEA Identify (screen) and intervene early “The priority should always be to deliver services, with assessment secondary to this aim” Use continuous progress monitoring to assess interventions and enhance outcomes Move from psychometric/cognitive assessment to direct “assessment of a child’s response to scientifically based instruction” A New Era: Revitalizing Special Education for Children and their Families (July 1, 2002). The Presidents Commission on Excellence in Education

6. Bottom Line… “In the absence of this… many children who are placed into special education are essentially instructional casualties and not students with disabilities” A New Era: Revitalizing Special Education for Children and their Families (July 1, 2002). The Presidents Commission on Excellence in Education

7. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Purpose of a Comprehensive Evaluation is to… Lead to effective programs and improved outcomes “Its all about the students”

8. Research-Based Core Curriculum w/ Strong Instruction Tier 2/3 Supplement al Intervention ASSESSMENT Formal Diagnostic As needed Formal Diagnostic As needed Progress Monitoring Weekly-Monthly Progress Monitoring Weekly-Monthly Universal Screening 3 times/year Universal Screening 3 times/year DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING Individual Problem Solving Team Schoolwide Screening reviewed 3 times/year Schoolwide Screening reviewed 3 times/year INSTRUCTION Tier 2/3 Supplement al Intervention Intervention Review Team 6-8 weeks Intervention Review Team 6-8 weeks Tier 3 Individualize d Intervention Individual Problem Solving Team 6-8 weeks Individual Problem Solving Team 6-8 weeks SPED referral Comprehensi ve Evaluation Individual Education Program (IEP)

9. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Referral: Is there suspicion of a disability?

10. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Individual vs. Team Referral

11. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Parent Referrals The team must consider the referral –Cannot refuse the referral due to RTI (OSEP, 2011) –Can refuse the evaluation if there is good evidence (i.e., data) indicating the student can be successful with general education supports –Must provide written notice to parents if the request to evaluate is refused Parents have a right to make a referral at any time

12. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Talk Time Turn to your partner and summarize what you can and cannot do with a parent referral in an RTI system.

13. Comprehensive SLD Eval: Regardless of Eval Model a)Academic assessment b)Review of records c)Observation (including regular education setting) d)Progress monitoring data g)Other: A.If needed, developmental history B.If needed, an assessment of cognition, etc. C.If needed, a medical statement D.Any other assessments to determine impact of disability Oregon Administrative Rules, 581-015-2170

14. Four Primary IDEA Criteria for Evaluating Learning Disabilities 1. Low Failure to meet age- or grade-level State standards in one of eight areas when provided appropriate instruction: Oral expression Listening comprehension Written expression Basic reading skill Reading fluency skills Reading comprehension Mathematics calculation Mathematics problem solving 2. Slow RTI: Lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction and intervention OR Pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, relative to age, State-approved grade-level standards, or intellectual development 3. Exclusionary Lack of progress not primarily the result of: Vision, hearing, or motor problems Intellectual disability Emotional disturbance Cultural factors Economic or environmental disadvantage Limited English proficiency 4. Exclusionary For all students: Demonstrate that under achievement is not due to lack of appropriate instruction in reading and math. Data demonstrating appropriate instruction Repeated assessments of student progress during instruction Inclusive Observation Exclusive Specific Learning Disability Adapted from Kovaleski, VanDerHeyden & Shapiro, 2013, p.16

15. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Three key questions Slow Progre ss Low Skills Instruction al Need SPED Entitlemen t Decision Is the student significantly different from peers? Does the student make less than adequate progress despite interventions? Does the student need specially designed instruction? =

16. Guidelines for Comprehensive Evaluation

17. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org First Question Low Skills Is the student significantly different from peers?

19. Low Skills: Is the student significantly different from peers? OAR Eligibility Requirement: The child does not achieve adequately for the child’s age or to meet Oregon grade-level standards in one or more of the following areas: basic reading skills reading fluency skills reading comprehension mathematics calculation mathematics problem solving written expression oral expression listening comprehension When provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the child’s age or Oregon grade- level standards [(581-015-2170 (3)(a)]

20. Significantly discrepant from peers How big of a discrepancy is significant?

21. General Guidelines* –Below the 16 th percentile? (1 SD below the mean) –Below the 10 th percentile? –Well below benchmark? –Bottom 10% as compared to peers? –More than 2 times discrepant from peers/expectations? *These are approximate guidelines and NOT rigid cut scores

22. Consider divergent data source(s) and possible explanations For Example: Group administered vs. Individual administered? Timed vs. Untimed? Multiple chances vs. One-time assessment? Accommodations vs No Accommodations What if the data is mixed?

23. What are you using? What assessments do you currently have that you can use to evaluate lows skills? –OAKS –CBMs –Achievement test –IQ test –Core program assessments –Diagnostic assessments Do you have district guidelines for what is significantly low?

24. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Second Question Slow Progre ss Low Skills Is the student significantly different from peers? Does the student make less than adequate progress despite interventions?

26. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Slow Progress: Does the student make inadequate progress despite intervention? OAR Eligibility Requirement: The student does not make sufficient progress to meet age or Oregon grade-level standards based on the student’s response to scientific, research- based intervention [581-015-2170 (3)(b)]

27. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org How much progress is enough?

28. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org How much progress is enough? How much growth should we expect? –National growth norms What does typical growth look like, on average?

29. National Growth Rates: Reading GradeAverage ORF Growth (WCPM)* Ambitious ORF Growth (WCPM)* Average Maze Growth (WCR)** 1230.4 21.520.4 311.50.4 40.851.10.4 50.50.80.4 60.30.650.4 *Fuchs et al (1993), **Fuchs & Fuchs (2004)

30. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org How much progress is enough? How much growth should we expect? –National growth norms What does typical growth look like on average? –Local growth norms What does typical growth look like in your district, school, classroom, or intervention group?

31. How much progress is enough? Typical growth rate: 1.4 wcpm per week Student in intervention making “typical” growth

32. How much progress is enough? Students in interventions must make more progress than the typical student in order to close the gap. Typical growth rate: 1.4 wcpm per week Student in intervention making ambitious growth: 2 wcpm per week

33. How much progress is enough? Students in interventions are receiving more instructional support than the typical student. Typical growth rate: 1.4 wcpm per week Student in intervention making ambitious growth: 2 wcpm per week

34. What interventions have been provided? In addition to 90 minutes of research-based core instruction Minimum of 30-45 minutes of daily, supplemental/targeted interventions using: Explicit, systematic, research-based curricular materials Research-based instructional strategies

35. What interventions have been provided? Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Fluency, Vocabulary, Comprehension? Computation, Problem Solving, Math Fluency, etc.? Written expression?

36. What interventions have been provided? Do you have evidence of implementation? Observations Checklists Rubrics

37. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Team Time How does your district define “adequate progress”? –Are there guidelines? How can you determine that interventions are: –Appropriately matched? –The right time and intensity? –Delivered with fidelity?

38. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Third Question Slow Progre ss Low Skills Instruction al Need Is the student significantly different from peers? Does the student make less than adequate progress despite interventions? Does the student need specially designed instruction?

40. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Instructional Need: Does the student need Special Education services ? OAR Eligibility Requirement: The child needs special education services as a result of the disability [581-015-2170 (4)(b)]

41. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Need for Special Education services What does the student need to be successful?

42. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org What conditions result in the most growth? 30 Minutes daily Phonics for Reading (8 students) Reduce group size to 4, increase OTR’s Increase to 45 minutes daily, add behavior plan

43. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Instructional Need? How do you distinguish if it is an instructional need (i.e. Beyond the scope of what general education can provide)?

44. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org How you determine instructional need? It comes down to the balance: How does the weight of the intervention compare to the rate of progress?

45. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Rule out Exclusionary Factors Slow Progre ss Low Skills Instruction al Need SPED Entitlemen t Decision Is the student significantly different from peers? Does the student make less than adequate progress despite interventions? Does the student need specially designed instruction? =

47. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Exclusionary Factors: Has the student had ample opportunity to learn? OAR Eligibility Requirement: A determination of whether the primary basis for the suspected disability is (i) a lack of appropriate instruction in reading (including the essential components of reading) or math; or (ii) Limited English proficiency [581-015-2170 (5)(g)]

48. Has the student had ample opportunity to learn? Core walkthrough data in the student’s classroom? Was core delivered with fidelity? Performance of other students in the classroom? Are other students in the classroom successful/proficient?

49. All SLD evaluations must include: “(A) Data that demonstrate that before, or as part of, the referral process, the child was provided appropriate instruction in regular education settings” RTI OAR 581-015-2170

50. Has the student had ample opportunity to learn? English language development Acculturation Cohort groups How do their skills and growth compare to students with similar language, acculturation, etc.?

51. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Three key questions Slow Progre ss Low Skills Instruction al Need SPED Entitlemen t Decision Is the student significantly different from peers? Does the student make less than adequate progress despite interventions? Does the student need specially designed instruction? =

52. Is this slow progress? Typical growth rate: 1.4 wcpm per week Student in intervention making “typical” growth True = A False = B

53. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Questions?

54. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org If we know that: RTI done well can benefit all students, and Intensive, targeted interventions can significantly change a student’s academic and neurological functioning, and IDEA, the OARS, and the courts support the use of RTI, and Merely placing students in SPED may not improve their chances for success, then Don’t we have an ethical obligation to implement fully and aggressively?

55. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org RTI Done Right, Not RTI Lite 1.Places onus firmly on instruction and increase achievement for all students 2.Minimizes “Instructional Casualties” 3.Focuses on “Instructional Need” 4.Provides information for meaningful, data- based IEPs 5.Creates a broader, deeper, and articulated continuum of services for SLD students

56. Start Slow to go FAST… Once you do there’ll be no stopping you!

57. Oregon Response to Intervention www.oregonrti.org Questions? Nicole Kaye, ORTIi Implementation Coach: nkaye@roseburg.k12.or.usnkaye@roseburg.k12.or.us Sally Helton, ORTIi Implementation Coach: shelton@ttsd.k12.or.usshelton@ttsd.k12.or.us Follow us!!!!! Twitter: @Oregon RTIi