Response to Intervention (RTI)

Together We can Do This!

Dr. Fred Litton, University of Houston, VictoriaDr. Kathleen Atkins,UCAMrs. Dee Dee Cain, UCA

Foundational Concepts, Vocabulary, and Tools

Response-to-Intervention and Problem-Solving are about:

Thinking DifferentlyAbout Problems, Causes, and Solutions (Concepts)

Talking DifferentlyAbout Problems, Causes, and Solutions (Vocabulary)

Doing Some Things Differently (Tools and Behaviors)

All the principles and components of RtI are about building abetter support system for

general education.• DOING IT BETTER• DOING IT DIFFERENTLY• PROVIDING MORE LEVELS OF

SUPPORT TO HELP ALL STUDENTS• REALLOCATING RESOURCES/SKILLS

IN DIFFERENT WAYS

Foundational Concepts:The InterventionsThe Data The Problem SolvingProcess

ACADEMIC SYSTEMS BEHAVIORAL SYSTEMS

STUDENTS

The VISION: To Provide Effective Interventions to Meet the Needs of ALL Students Through Early and Scientifically Based Interventions Through Careful

Systems Planning

Tier 1 Core Instructional Interventions• All students• Preventive, proactive 80% 80%

Tier 1 Core Instructional Interventions• All settings, All students• Preventive, proactive

Tier 2 Targeted Group Interventions• Some students (at-risk)• High efficiency• Rapid response

15%Tier 2 Targeted Group Interventions• Some students (at-risk)• High efficiency• Rapid response

15%

Tier 3 Intensive, Individual Interventions• Individual Students• Assessment - based• Intense, durable procedures

5%

Tier 3 Intensive, Individual Interventions• Individual Students• Assessment - based• High intensity• Of longer duration

5%

What is ‘Response to Intervention (RtI)’?(Batsche, Elliott, Graden, Grimes, Kovaleski, Prasse, Reschly, Scharg, Tilley, 2005)

• Identifying and providing high quality instruction and research-based interventions matched to students needs

• Measuring rate of improvement (ROI) over time to make important educational decisions

• Educators use ongoing student performance data to determine if an intervention is working. If it is not, it is time to do something different

Problem Solving Method

Plan Evaluation

Did our plan work?

Problem AnalysisWhy is it happening?

Problem IdentificationIs there a problem? What is it?

Plan DevelopmentWhat shall we do about it?

Problem Solving is….

• A decision making process around which development and evaluation (of tiers) of interventions and RtI occurs (our thinking!)

• Data based decision making is the CORE.• It is designed to improve the educational and

behavioral outcomes of ALL students.

If you’ve heard of ‘flex’, it is Illinois’s version/name for Problem Solving.

What RTI Is and Is Not

Is:• RtI is an overall integrated system of

service delivery- a systems change.

Is Not:• RtI is not just an eligibility system—a

way of finding students eligible and/or reducing the numbers of students placed into special education. This is ‘incidential’ to an RtI system.

The Educational Stars Are Aligning

• No Child Left Behind• Reading First• President’s Commission on Special

Education Excellence• IDEA Reauthorization 2004• Arkansas Dyslexia Law• Creates tremendous opportunity for

schools to make significant changes in how they help students !

RTI in IDEA 2004

“the local educational agency shall not be required to take into consideration whether the child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability”

RTI in IDEA 2004

In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, a local educational agency may usea process which determines if a child responds to scientific, research-based interventions.

Process refers to “Problem Solving ProcessResponds refers to “Response to Intervention

PERMISSION AND ENCOURAGEMENT

IDEA 2004 CHANGES: Eligibility Determinations

A child shall not be determined to be a child with a disability if determinant factor is:

•Lack of scientifically-basedinstructional practices and interventions that contain the essential 5 components of reading instruction.•Lack of instruction in math•Limited English Proficiency

In addition…

For a child suspected of having a specific learning disability, the group must consider,.. as part of the evaluation …data that demonstrates that--

…the child was provided appropriate high-quality, research-based instruction in regular education settings, …

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEIA)

And…

For a child suspected of having a specific learning disability, the group must consider,.. as part of the evaluation …data that demonstrates that--

…Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, which was provided to the child’s parents.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEIA)

Idea #1

An RtI intervention system is about having a multiple systemof instruction and intervention.

Problem-Solving Can Be Used For Anything!

• Direct Academic Behaviors– Reading– Mathematics– Written Language

• Academic Supporting Behaviors– Task/Homework Completion– Academic Engaged Time

• Social Behaviors– Social Skills– Disruptive Behaviors

Teaming to Weave Interventions With Data

FRAMEWORK for ANY Behavior:Intervention Systems at each tier and data

TIER I.

TIER II.At-risk students-Supplemental interventions

TIER III.Highly at-risk studentsIntensive interventions

Work completion,Attendance,Disruptive Behaviors,

% complete,Attendance records,SWIS data

•District or School Level Decisions

•Classroom or Group Decisions

•Individual Student Decisions

Idea #2

An RtI intervention system is about increasing the intensityof instruction and intervention, as needed.

Remedial/Intensive Instruction & Intervention

Accelerated/Targeted Instruction & Intervention

Preventive Instruction & Intervention

RTI is about intensity of intervention and instruction

Example of 3-Tier Level Interventions

Time

Curricular Focus

Curricular Breadth

Frequency of Progress Monitoring

Tier I

90

5 areas

Core

3X Yearly or greater

Tier 2

120

Less than 5

Core+

Supplemental

Monthly or

greater

Tier 3

180

2 or less

Core+

Intensive

Weekly

Reading

How can immediate, intensive interventions be scheduled and delivered?

1. Delivered by regular classroom teacher during the “uninterrupted reading period”

2. Delivered by additional resource personnel during the “uninterrupted reading period”, or at other times during day

3. Delivered by classroom and resource personnel during after school or before school programs

5. Delivered by peers or trained parent volunteers during “uninterrupted reading period”

6. Delivered by computers throughout the day

7. Power Hour

4. Delivered by well-trained and supervised paraprofessionals during the “uninterrupted reading period” or other times

Changing Emphasis of Big Ideas

Comprehension

Vocabulary

Automaticity and Fluency with the

Code

Alphabetic Principle

Phonological Awareness

321K

ListeningReading

ListeningReading

MultisyllablesLetter Sounds & Combinations

Idea #3

RtI is about using different data measures to makedecisions.

RTI is about different data measures

Progress Monitoring and

Diagnostic Assessment

& Strategic Monitoring

Universal Screening and Benchmarking (Early Literacy and Numeracy, Oral Reading, Comprehension, Math Computation, Spelling and Writing Fluency Measures.)

5%

15%

80%

All assessment measures directly linked to interventions

BIG IDEA: Integrated Assessment Systems

Assessment Instruction

This is what we want..

Aligning Assessment and Instruction

This is what we’ve had.

In an RtI System, Keep in Mind the Purposes of Assessment

Who has problems? (Problem Identification)

Why is the problem is occurring? (Problem Analysis)

Is our instruction working to fix the problem?

(Plan Development & Implementation)

How well are we doing overall?

(Plan Evaluation)

Taken from Heartland AEA 11

Response to Intervention integrates assessment and intervention within a multi-level prevention system to maximize student achievement and to reduce behavioral problems.

With RTI, schools use data to:

• identify students at risk for poor learning outcomes,

• monitor student progress,

• provide evidence-based interventions, and

• adjust the intensity and nature of those interventions depending on a student’s responsiveness, and

• identify students with learning disabilities or other disabilities” (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2010).

Assumptions

All students can learn – neither biology nor SES precludes success in learning

Learning is strongly influenced by the quality of instruction – especially for at-risk students

There is a predictable relationship between instructional quality and learning outcomes

Both general classroom programs and specific interventions are evidence-based to provide greater instructional quality

AssumptionsAssuming the curriculum content is evidence-based - other causal variables include instructional intensity: lesson frequency, program duration, group size, engagement, lesson pacing, mastery criteria, number of response opportunities, academic engaged time, correction procedures, goal specificity, instructor skill.

Useful for both beginning and remedial instruction

All beginning students are screened for the pre-skills that evidence highlights are necessary for success

All students are provided with research-validatedinstruction from the beginning

• Current attainment is assessed. A student displaying slow progress is given one or more additional research-validated interventions

• Academic progress is monitored frequently to detect change using Curriculum Based Measures (CBM)

• If no worthwhile change is occurring, fidelity to the program is checked

• If fidelity is evident, then presentation aspects are changed -frequency, duration, group size, or use of a specialist instructor

3 Tier pyramid of intervention

What are the advantages of RTI?• It allows schools to intervene early to meet the needs of

struggling learners, and prevent Matthew Effects.

• RTI procedures document what specific instructional strategies are found to benefit a particular student.

• High accountability due to frequent monitoring

• Many fewer students receive resource-intensive referrals, as most are adequately supported by the RTI system.

How to estimate an academic skill gap• Local Norms: A sample of students at a school is screened in an academic

skill to create grade norms

• Research Norms: Norms for ‘typical’ growth are derived from a research sample, published, and applied by schools to their own student populations e.g., standardised tests or state norms

• Criterion-Referenced Benchmarks: A minimum level of competence is determined for a skill.

Example of a criterion-referenced benchmark:

DIBELS [Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills].

3rd-grade students are at ‘low risk’ for reading problems if they reach these reading-fluency goals:

• Start of School Year: 77 Words Correctly Read Per Min

• Middle of School Year: 92 WC/M• End of School Year: 110 WC/M

Another example of a criterion-referenced benchmark

The single strongest predictor of a prep child’s end-of-year spelling ability is a 1-minute letter-sound fluency test at the year’s beginning (Al Otaiba et al., 2010)

Example from DIBELS: Initial Sound Fluency (ISF): Student shown sets of 4 pictures for a total of 1 minute.

“This is: tomato, cub, plate, doughnut” (point to each picture).

Which picture begins with /d/?

ISF < 4 At risk4 < ISF < 8 Some riskISF > 8 Low risk

Determine reason for low performance:Skill Deficit: Student lacks the necessary skills to perform the academic task.

Fragile Skills: Student possesses the necessary skills but is not yet fluent and automatic in those skills.

Motivation Deficit: The student has the necessary skills but lacks the motivation to complete the academic task.

Select an evidence-based intervention to improve academic functioning

Any intervention chosen for the student must be backed by scientific research (e.g., by empirical research articles in peer-reviewed professional journals) demonstrating that the intervention is effective in addressing similar students’ underlying reason(s) for academic failure.

Example, summary of research on struggling ESL students

The beginning reading programs with the strongest evidence of effectiveness in this review made use of systematic phonics, such as Success for All, Direct Instruction, and Jolly Phonics (Slavin & Cheung, 2003).

Monitor struggling students’ academic progress frequently to evaluate the impact of the intervention

Interventions are monitored frequently (e.g., weekly/fortnightly) using valid and reliable measures sensitive to short-term gains in student performance.

Tests also need to be brief, given time constraints

Measures for classroom academic and general behaviours

Measures for Basic Academic Skills: CBM probes - short, timed (usually 1 min) assessments to measure phonemic awareness, oral reading fluency, maths computation, writing, and spelling skills

Daily Behaviour Report Cards:

Customized teacher rating forms allow the teacher to evaluate the student’s behaviours each day

Direct Observation:An external observer visits the classroom to observe the student’s

rates of on-task and academically engaged behaviours.

Only if failure to respond to several well-implemented intervention levels - consider a full assessment.

• The interventions were carried out as designed (treatment/intervention integrity)

• Progress-monitoring data shows that the student did not meet the goal set for his or her improvement

In the RTI model what is different?

• A structured format for problem-solving.

• Knowledge of a range of scientifically based interventions that address common reasons for school failure.

• The ability to use various methods of assessment to monitor student progress in academic and behavioural areas.

Implementing RTI: Next Steps

Train staff to collect frequent progress-monitoring data. Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) can be used to assess a student’s accuracy and speed in basic-skill areas such as reading fluency, math computation, writing, spelling, and pre-literacy skills.

Teachers can measure the behavior of struggling learners on a daily basis by using classroom daily behavior report cards: simple rating forms to track work completion, attention to task, compliance with teacher directions, and other behaviors that influence learning.

The issue of teacher training to properly implement interventions…….

Teacher training does not generally equip teachers in either the evidence base for the initial teaching of reading or with the tools to intervene effectively with students who struggle with literacy in particular (Fielding-Barnsley, 2010; Mellard, 2009; Productivity Commission, 2012).

From the Australian Government’s Sep, 2012 Response to recommendations of the Dyslexia Working Party Report ‘Helping people with dyslexia: A national action agenda’.

Recommendation 6. Evidence-based teaching• All schools ensure that the three Waves (Tiers) of literacy

provision are in place, are of a high quality, and are well-coordinated.

• Provision should be made for close monitoring of students ‘at risk’ of dyslexia as well as those diagnosed with dyslexia.

• Learning Support should be provided for those diagnosed with dyslexia through a written Support Plan that incorporates individual literacy teaching, resilience teaching, and classroom accommodations.

What type of training is needed within schools?

(Mellard, 2009).

Other useful fluency measures (Binder’s criteria reflect full automaticity)

1. Phonemic Awareness Fluency

• Blend sounds to form words (hear/say) 12 – 10 / min

• Segment words into sounds moving colored blocks to mark sounds (hear-do/say) 50-40 sounds /min

• Make new words by substituting one phoneme for another (hear/say) 20 – 15 / min

2. Phonics Fluency

• Read consonants and vowel sounds (see/say) 120 – 80 /min

• Read nonsense words (see/say) 120 – 100 / min

• Read real words (see/say) 130 – 100 / min

3. Basic Arithmetic

• Count by 1’s, 2’s, 5’s, and 10’s (free/say) 120 – 100 /min

• Read numbers (see/say) 150 – 120 / min

• Write numbers 0-9 repeatedly (free/write) 120 – 100 / min

• Say or write answers to basic +, -, x, and / facts (see/write, see/say) 100-70 /min

Other free CBM measures

• AIMSweb http://www.aimsweb.com/Benchmarking and progress monitoring assessments for

Reading, Language and Maths, Grades P-8

• Easycbm http://www.easycbm.com/Benchmarking and progress monitoring assessments for

Reading and Maths, Grades P-8

• See also Intervention Centralhttp://www.interventioncentral.org/cbm_warehouse#2

A 2.5 crwm/week fluency target - from 30 to 55 wcrm in 10 weeks

Outcomes associated with fluency:

Improvement in:• Retention and maintenance of skill• Endurance, attention span, resistance to distraction• Application of knowledge and skill to more complex tasks e.g., fluency with

number tables improves maths problem solving• Decoding fluency enhances comprehension

Reading fluency and comprehension• You don’t need to use your conscious mind to read it

• This frees up resources for comprehension

• Very high (0 .91) correlations between oral reading rate and reading comprehension (Fuchs et al., 2001)

• Oral reading fluency is easy to test.

Students in 3rd grade at or above 110 wcpm are at low risk of reading below grade level (9%) on the state reading comprehension test (FCAT, like NAPLAN)

Students scoring below 80 wcpm are at high risk

Fluency (wcpm)

Reading fluency and the brain

Poor readers’ brain activity before phonologically based instruction

Left Hemisphere Right Hemisphere

Poor readers’ brain activity after 80 hrs phonologically based instruction

Left Hemisphere Right Hemisphere

What about dyslexia?

“ … we are not suggesting that children diagnosed as having dyslexia cannot make progress in learning to read. Rather, our claim is that these children require more intensive instruction of longer duration of the kind provided in the third tier of RTI models” (Tunmer & Greaney, 2010).

How do I find evidence-based programs?

NECTAC: National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center[http://www.nectac.org/topics/evbased/evbased.asp]

The American Institutes for Research: http://www.air.org/files/csrq.pdfFlorida Center for Reading Research:

http://www.fcrr.org/interventions/Interventions.shtmOregon Reading First Center: http://reading.uoregon.eduCenter for Data-Driven Reform in Education:

http://www.bestevidence.orgEducation Consumers Foundation: http://www.education-

consumers.orgFree Curriculum-Based Measurement resources at CBM Warehouse

http://www.interventioncentral.org/cbm_warehouseInternational Dyslexia Association http://www.eida.org

Special issue of Psychology in the Schools:Jones, R. E., & Ball, C. R. (2012). Introduction to the special issue: Addressing response

to intervention implementation: Questions from the field. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 207–209.

Jones, R. E., Yssel, N., & Grant, C. (2012). Reading instruction in tier 1: Bridging the gaps by nesting evidence-based interventions within differentiated instruction. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 210–218.

Kupzyk, S., Daly, E. J., Ihlo, T. & Young, N. D. (2012). Modifying instruction within tiers in multitiered intervention programs. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 219–230.

Ball, C. R. & Christ, T. J. (2012), Supporting valid decision making: Uses and misuses of assessment data within the context of RTI. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 231–244.

Nellis, L. M. (2012). Maximizing the effectiveness of building teams in response to intervention implementation. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 245–256.

Lembke, E. S., Hampton, D., & Beyers, S. J. (2012). Response to intervention in mathematics: Critical elements. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 257–272.

Pyle, N., & Vaughn, S. (2012). Remediating reading difficulties in a response to intervention model with secondary students. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 273–284.

Hernández Finch, M. E. (2012). Special considerations with response to intervention and instruction for students with diverse backgrounds. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 285–296.

O'Connor, E. P., & Freeman, E. W. (2012). District-level considerations in supporting and sustaining RtI implementation. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 297–310.

More References

Al Otaiba, S., Puranik, C.S., Rouby, D.A., Greulich, L., Sidler, J.F., Lee, J. (2010). Predicting kindergarteners' end-oyear spelling ability based on their reading, alphabetic, vocabulary, and phonological awareness skills as well as prior literacy experiences. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(3), 171-183.

Binder, C., Haughton, E., & Bateman, B. (2002). Fluency: Achieving true mastery in the learning process. www.fluency.org/Binder_Haughton_Bateman.pdf

Fielding-Barnsley, R. (2010): Australian pre-service teachers' knowledge of phonemic awareness and phonics in the process of learning to read. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 15(1), 99-110.

Harn, B.A. Jamgochian, E., & Parisi, D.M. (2009). Characteristics of students who don’t respond to research-based interventions. Council for Exceptional Children. http://www.cec.sped.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=CEC_Today1&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=10645

Mellard, D., McKnight, M., & Jordan, J. (2010). RTI tier structures and instructional intensity. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25(4), 217–225.

Mellard, D. (2009, June). Response to intervention: Reforms to meet the needs of all students. Presented at the Supporting Student Learning Conference, Indianapolis, IN.

National Center on Response to Intervention (March 2010). Essential Components of RTI – A closer look at Response to Intervention. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Response to Intervention. http://www.rti4success.org/pdf/rtiessentialcomponents_042710.pdf

Sadler, C., & Sugai, G. (2009). Effective behavior and instructional support: A district model for early identification and prevention of reading and behavior problems. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 35-46.

Slavin, R.E., & Cheung, A. (2003). Effective reading programs for English language learners: A best-evidence synthesis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk. Retrieved 5/2/2004 from ww.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/techReports/Report66.pdf

Tunmer, W., & Greaney, K. (2010). Defining dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(3) 229–243.Wanzek J., & Vaughn, S. (2008). Response to varying amounts of time in reading intervention for students with

low response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 126–142.

Other Resources

Learning Difficulties Australia [http://www.ldaustralia.org/304.html]National Center on Response to Intervention[http://www.rti4success.org/]RTI Action Network [http://www.rtinetwork.org/]National Center for Learning Disabilities [www.ncld.org/ ]A Parent Guide to RTI [http://www.ncld.org/publications-a-

more/parent-advocacy-guides/a-parent-guide-to-rti] Research Roundup [http://www.ncld.org/ld-basics/research-

roundup]Wrightslaw [http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/rti.index.htm]Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

[http://www.pbis.org/default.aspx]

Local QLD resources for RnR

RnR enables schools to align and implement existing departmental and national educational initiatives and requirements:

· Roadmap for curriculum, teaching, assessment and reportinghttp://www.learningplace.com.au/uploads/documents/store/doc_755_

2734_The_Roadmap.pdf

· Schoolwide Positive Behaviour Supporthttp://education.qld.gov.au/studentservices/behaviour/swpbs/index.ht

ml

· A Whole-School Approach to Improving Student Achievementhttp://www.learningplace.com.au/uploads/documents/store/doc_755_

2764_A_wholeschool_approach_to_improving_student_achievement_V2_Apr_2010.pdf

Acknowledgement

This presentation has borrowed shamelessly from the work of Carl Binder and Jim Wright.

Adapted from:Hempenstall, K. (In press). Response to intervention: Accountability in

action. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties,