1. Part 2: Assisting Students Struggling with Reading: Multi-Tier System of Supports H325A120003

2. Part 2 uses content and resources from: Center on Response to Intervention at the American Institutes for Research (http://www.rti4success.org)http://www.rti4success.org The Meadows Center for the Prevention of Educational Risk ©University of Texas System/Texas Education Agency Note

3. Multi-Tier System of Supports (MTSS): A comprehensive system of differentiated supports that includes: Universal screening. Progress monitoring. Evidence-based instruction. Data-based decision making. Defining MTSS 3

4. Intended to support all students Is not a stand alone product, class, or instruction program. Allows educators to evaluate the success of: o Grade levels/classes. o Instructional groups. o Individual students, including those with disabilities. MTSS Is a Preventative Framework... 4

5. 1. Screening 2. Progress monitoring 3. School-wide, multi-level prevention system o Primary Level (i.e., core, universal, Tier 1). o Supplemental Level (i.e., secondary, Tier 2). o Intensive Level (i.e., Tier 3). 4. Data-based decision making for: o Instruction. o Evaluating effectiveness. o Movement within the multi-level system. Essential Components of MTSS 5

6. Screening Essential Component 6

7. PURPOSE: Identify students who are at risk for poor reading outcomes. FOCUS: ALL students. TOOLS: Brief assessments that are valid, reliable, and demonstrate diagnostic accuracy for predicting learning or behavioral problems. TIMEFRAME: Administered more than one time per year (e.g., fall, winter, spring). Screening 7

8. Areas for Screening in Early Reading Letter-naming fluency. Phoneme segmentation. Nonsense word fluency. Word identification. Oral reading fluency.

9. Screening Answers the questions: Is core curriculum effective? Which students need additional assessment and instruction? 9

10. Progress Monitoring Essential Component 10

11. PURPOSE: Monitor students’ responses to core, supplemental, or intensive instruction to estimate rates of improvement, identify students who are not demonstrating adequate progress, and compare the effectiveness of different forms of instruction. FOCUS: Students identified through screening as at risk for poor learning outcomes. TOOLS: Brief assessments that are valid, reliable, and evidence based. TIMEFRAME: Students are assessed at regular intervals (e.g., weekly, biweekly, monthly). Progress Monitoring 11

12. Progress Monitoring Answers the questions: Are students meeting short- and long-term performance goals? Are students making progress at an acceptable rate? Does the instruction need to be adjusted or changed? 12

13. Screening vs. Progress Monitoring Close cousins. Often, the same tools used. It is important to distinguish: o Universal screening, which is for all students, from o Progress monitoring, which is for some students who have been identified as at risk.

14. Choosing Screening and Progress Monitoring Tools The Center on Response to Intervention, in collaboration with the National Center on Intensive Intervention, conduct annual reviews of tools and interventions in screening, progress monitoring, and academic intervention programs.National Center on Intensive Intervention http://www.rti4success.org/resources/tools-charts

15. NCRTI Screening Tools Chart 15 http://www.rti4success.org/toolschartsLanding

16. National Center on Intensive Intervention Progress Monitoring Tools Chart 16 http://www.intensiveintervention.org/chart/progress-monitoring

17. Multi-Level Support System 17

18. Evidence-Based Interventions Essential Component 18

19. FOCUS: ALL students. INSTRUCTION: District curriculum and instructional practices that are research based, aligned with state or district standards, and incorporate differentiated instruction. SETTING: General education classroom. ASSESSMENTS: Screening, continual progress monitoring, and outcome measures or summative assessments. Core Instruction 19

20. Whole Group Instruction (9:27) http://resources.buildingrti.utexas.org/CAP /Differentiated_Instruction/Differentiated _Instruction.swf Meadows Center Clips 20

21. FOCUS: Students of differing abilities in the same classroom. INSTRUCTION: District curriculum and instructional practices that are research based, aligned with state or district standards, and incorporate differentiated instruction that is explicit, systematic, and includes teacher modeling. SETTING: General education classroom. ASSESSMENTS: Screening, continual progress monitoring, and outcome measures or summative assessments. Differentiated Instruction 21

22. Differentiated Core Instruction (17:49) http://buildingrti.utexas.org/CAP/Differenti ated_Instruction/Differentiated_Instructi on.swf Meadows Center Clips 22

23. FOCUS: Students identified through screening as at risk for poor learning outcomes. INSTRUCTION: Targeted, supplemental instruction delivered to small groups; instruction is delivered with fidelity (i.e., consistent with the way it was designed). SETTING: General education classroom or other general education location within the school. ASSESSMENTS: Progress monitoring, diagnostic. Gersten et al., 2005; Mellard & Johnson, 2007; Sanetti & Kratochwill, 2009 Supplemental Instruction 23

24. Supplemental Intervention (25:20) http://buildingrti.utexas.org/CAP/Differenti ated_Instruction/Differentiated_Instruction.swf Meadows Center Clip 24

25. What is similar about the small group instruction provided at the core and supplemental levels of instruction? What were the differences? Who received instruction at the core and supplemental levels? Core and Supplemental Instruction 25

26. FOCUS: Students who have not responded to core and supplemental level prevention. INSTRUCTION: Intensive, supplemental instruction delivered individually or to small groups or. SETTING: General education classroom or other general education location within the school. ASSESSMENTS: Progress monitoring, diagnostic. Intensive Intervention 26

27. Match of intervention to observed skill deficit (i.e., individualization based on assessment data). Pedagogy. Intervention. Duration. Frequency. Interventionist. Group size. Behavior/motivation strategies. Changing the Intensity and Nature of Instruction 27

28. Instruction and MTSS College- and career-ready standards can be addressed across levels of MTSS in reading. Examples of how to apply standards-relevant instruction across core instruction, supplemental intervention and intensive intervention can be found at the link below. http://www.intensiveintervention.org/standards-relevant- instruction-multi-tiered-systems-support-mtss-or-response- intervention#sthash.mzJs6Y9T.dpuf

29. MTSS Phonological Awareness http://www.intensiveintervention.org/standards-relevant-instruction- multi-tiered-systems-support-mtss-or-response-intervention

30. Data-Based Decision Making Essential Component 30

31. Analyze data at all levels of MTSS implementation (i.e., state, district, school, and grade level) and all levels of prevention (i.e., core, supplemental, and intensive). Establish routines and procedures for making decisions. Set explicit decision rules for assessing student progress (e.g., state and district benchmarks, level, rate). Use data to compare and contrast the adequacy of the core curriculum and the effectiveness of different instructional and behavioral strategies. Data-Based Decision Making: The Basics 31

32. Instruction. Evaluate effectiveness within and across groups. Movement within the multi-tiered system. Data-Based Decision Making: Types of Decisions 32

33. Assessment-Driven Reading Instruction 33 McKenna & Walpole,2005

34. Need More Information? http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/practiceguide.aspx?sid=3

35. National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII): www.intensiveintervention.org National Center on Response to Intervention (NCRTI): www.rti4success.org Middle School RTI Content (NCRTI): http://www.rti4success.org/rtisearch RTI Action Network: www.rtinetwork.org IDEA Partnership: www.ideapartnership.org Need More Information? 35

36. Disclaimer This content was produced under U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H325A120003. Bonnie Jones and David Guardino serve as the project officers. 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.