1. NYS Response to Intervention Technical Assistance Center: Lessons Learned from a Five Year Demonstration Project DR. THERESA JANCZAK NYS RTI TAC PROJECT DIRECTOR DECEMBER 3 RD, 2015

2. Location: Buffalo State College NYS RtI TAC Funding Source: NYS ED – Office of Special Education P-12 Funding Period: 1 st Cycle: 1/09- 12/14 2 nd Cycle – 1/15-12/18 Staffing:.6 FTE PD 1.0 FTE Webinar Coor..50 FTE Admin. Asst.50 FTE Proj. Coor. 6 Consortium Members (15- 20 days) Website: nysrti.org

3. 3 MISSION Support capacity-building efforts of NYS schools to implement proven and promising practices within a Response to Intervention model.

4. 4 GOALS: #1. Compile/disseminate relevant & useful information, resources, and tools relative to RtI NYS RtI TAC NYS RtI TAC # 2. Provide indirect technical assistance (TA) & professional development (PD) to NYS schools on RtI-related topics http://www.nysrti.org/ http://www.nysrti.org/ 3. Provide direct technical assistance & professional development to RtI pilot demonstration schools

5. 2016 NYS RtI TAC Statewide Trainings Response to Intervention: A Multi-Tiered System of Supports March 8 th – Capitol Region March 9 th – Westchester May 11 th – Western NY May 12 th – Long Island Presenter: Dr. George Batsche

6. 6 GOALS: #1. Compile/disseminate relevant & useful information, resources, and tools relative to RtI NYS RtI TAC NYS RtI TAC # 2. Provide indirect technical assistance (TA) & professional development (PD) to NYS schools on RtI-related topics http://www.nysrti.org/ http://www.nysrti.org/ 3. Provide direct technical assistance & professional development to RtI pilot demonstration schools

7. 7 RtI Pilot Schools by School Type School Type# Name Large City 3 George Mather Forbes, Rochester Frank A. Sedita, Buffalo Public School Bronx Charter School for the Arts, NYC Small City 4 Milton Fletcher, Jamestown CSD West Street Elementary, Geneva CSD Park Terrace Elementary, Gloversville ESD Meco-McNab Elementary, Gloversville ESD Suburban 4 Brookside Elementary, Ossining CSD Woodside Elementary, Peekskill CSD Marshall Elementary School, Hempstead CSD Joseph A. Edgar, Intermediate Rocky Point CSD Rural 2 Groton Elementary School, Groton CSD Burton Street Elementary School, Cazenovia CSD

8. The Five-Year Plan 8 YearFocusAccomplishments/Tasks 1 2009-2010 Infrastructure Establishing infrastructure Hire RtI Literacy Coach Establish RtI Core Team Self-assess RtI Readiness Select screening and progress monitoring tool Provide RtI Overview Train staff on screening & PM measures 2 2010-2011 Assessment Establishing an Assessment system Administer universal screening 3x per year Conduct fidelity checks on universal screening assessments PM students receiving Tier 2 & Tier 3 interventions Establish decision rules Conduct assessment audit Gather baseline data to determine efficacy of RtI process 3 2011-2012 Core Instruction Strengthening Core Instruction @ Tier 1 Differentiate instruction in Tier 1 Conduct fidelity checks on core instruction @ Tier 1 Re-assess RtI readiness & implementation 4 2012-2013 Tiered Intervention Strengthen interventions @ Tiers 2 & 3 Create Intervention menu for tiers 2 & 3 Provide training on all interventions Conduct fidelity checks on implementation of all interventions 5 - 6 2013-2014 2014-15 Sustaining RtI Institutionalizing the Process Systematizing Data-Based Decision Making Planning for the long term Re-assess RtI readiness & implementation

9. 9 COMPARING RtI READINESS RESULTS: 2009/2010 - 2013/2014 Greatest gains from highest to lowest: Teaming/Collaboration Infrastructure Leadership Assessment: Screening Assessment: Progress Monitoring Tier 3 Intervention Tier 2 Intervention Tier 1 Intervention Parental Involvement

10. Student Performance Data Benchmark data analyzed three different ways :  Risk Status: % of students testing at low, some, and at-risk levels per benchmark period by grade level and student type per literacy measure  Average Benchmark : average benchmark score per literacy measure per benchmark period by grade level and student type per literacy measure  Tiered Intervention: percent of students receiving Tier 1, 2 and 3 per benchmark period by grade level and student type per literacy measure Note: See Appendix C for copies of data forms

11. Risk Status General Education – 2 nd Grade FRANK A SEDITA RTI DATA 2011-2012 Total N=65 Total N=45 ORF Total N=43

12. MJ Fletcher 2011-12 Tiered Intervention General Education – 4 th Grade MJ FLETCHER RTI DATA 2011-2012 Total N=82 Total N=79 Total N=82

14. West Street Elementary School Second Grade Average Benchmark Score per Student Type GradeFall BenchmarkWinter BenchmarkSpring Benchmark 2446890

15. 15 Pilot schools starting to build capacity for an effective program = more students reaching benchmark Appropriate use of assessments Data meeting discussions are focused on student outcomes: data-driven Schedules are starting to support interventions RtI influence has expanded to other supports Teacher "buy-in" Relationships, Trust, and Ownership has increased Common Goals Fidelity to Data More opportunities for Bilingual students Increase in the # of data-based referrals to CSE

16. Variables Contributing to Successful RtI 16 Strong leadership @ the building level: principal is intimately involved in the process Highly functioning RtI Core/Design Team that meets regularly to address infrastructure issues related to RtI Appropriate use of assessment tools Commitment to fidelity of process and intervention SED emphasis on data-driven instruction Use of data to inform process Annual RtI action plan Classroom support for teachers: coaching Communication with all school staff

17. Lessons Learned RTI IS A PROCESS LEADERSHIP IS KEY (SED, CENTRAL OFFICE, AND BUILDING) DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS DIRECT TA HELPS KEEPS SCHOOLS FOCUSED RTI = SCHOOL REFORM MODEL SLOW AND STEADY WINS THE RACE COMMUNICATION IS ESSENTIAL COMMON VISION IS NECESSARY DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING IS KEY

18. 18 Limited resources of personnel Staff attrition Larger class sizes Time Increasing Demands Scheduling intervention time SED Vision AIS/RtI confusion Engage NY Morale Rate of change Disconnect between building/district Competing Interests Common Core APPR