Responsiveness-to-Intervention:What is It?

George SugaiOSEP Center on PBIS

Center for Behavioral Education and Research

University of ConnecticutOctober 11,02008

www.pbis.org www.cber.org

George.sugai@uconn.edu

www.pbis.org

PURPOSEProvide brief overview of features of Responsiveness-to-Intervention for EVERYONE in school

Outcomes

RtI Rationale

RtI Definition

RtI: Good “IDEiA” PolicyApproach or framework for redesigning

& establishing teaching & learning environments that are effective,

efficient, relevant, & durable for all students, families & educators

• NOT program, curriculum, strategy, intervention

• NOT limited to special education

• NOT new

Quotable Fixsen

“Policy is allocation of limited resources for unlimited needs

– Opportunity, not guarantee, for good action”

“Training does not predict action”

– “Manualized treatments have created overly rigid & rapid applications”

RtI Features

RtI

Response to Intervention

RtI History & Logic

1-5% 1-5%

5-10% 5-10%

80-90% 80-90%

Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•High Intensity

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

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

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

Universal Interventions•All students•Preventive, proactive

Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive

Responsiveness to Intervention

Academic Systems Behavioral Systems

Circa 1996

“Triangle” ?’s

• Why triangle?

• Why not pyramid or octagon?

• Why not 12 tiers? 2 tiers?

• What’s it got to do w/ education?

• Where’d those %’s come from?

Public Health & Disease PreventionKutash et al., 2006; Larson, 1994

• Tertiary (FEW)– Reduce complications,

intensity, severity of current cases

• Secondary (SOME)– Reduce current cases of

problem behavior

• Primary (ALL)– Reduce new cases of

problem behavior

Specialized Individual Interventions(Individual StudentSystem)

Continuum of Effective BehaviorSupport

Specialized GroupInterventions(At-Risk System)

Universal Interventions (School-Wide SystemClassroom System)

Studentswithout SeriousProblemBehaviors (80 -90%)

Students At-Risk for Problem Behavior(5-15%)

Students withChronic/IntenseProblem Behavior(1 - 7%)

Primary Prevention

Secondary Prevention

Tertiary Prevention

All Students in SchoolCirca 1994

Primary Prevention:School-/Classroom-Wide Systems for

All Students,Staff, & Settings

Secondary Prevention:Specialized Group

Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior

Tertiary Prevention:Specialized

IndividualizedSystems for Students

with High-Risk Behavior

~80% of Students

~15%

~5%

CONTINUUM OFSCHOOL-WIDE

INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR

SUPPORT

ALL

SOME

FEW

1-5% 1-5%

5-10% 5-10%

80-90% 80-90%

Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•High Intensity

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

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

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

Universal Interventions•All students•Preventive, proactive

Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive

Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success

Academic Systems Behavioral Systems

Circa 1996

RtI Application Examples

EARLY READING/LITERACY SOCIAL BEHAVIOR

TEAMGeneral educator, special

educator, reading specialist, Title I, school psychologist, etc.

General educator, special educator, behavior specialist, Title I, school

psychologist, etc.

UNIVERSAL SCREENING

Curriculum based measurement SSBD, record review, gating

PROGRESS MONITORING

Curriculum based measurementODR, suspensions, behavior incidents, precision teaching

EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS

5-specific reading skills: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension

Direct social skills instruction, positive reinforcement, token economy, active supervision, behavioral contracting,

group contingency management, function-based support, self-

management

DECISION MAKING RULES

Core, strategic, intensive Primary, secondary, tertiary tiers

All

Some

FewRTI

Continuum of Support for

ALL

Dec 7, 2007

Questions to Ponder• What is “scientifically/evidence-based”

intervention/practice?

• How do we measure & ensure “fidelity of implementation?”

• How do we determine “non-responsiveness?”

• Can we affect “teacher practice?”

• Do we have motivation to increase efficiency of “systems” organization?

• ???

Possible RtI OutcomesGresham, 2005

Responder Non-Responder

High Risk

False +Adequate response

True +Inadequate response

No Risk

True –Adequate response

False –Inadequate response

Avoiding False +/-

Messages

RtI logic is good thing for all students, families, & schools

Still some work to refine technology, practices, & systems

Implications & complexities for practice, systems, & implementation

George.sugai@uconn.edu

Robh@uoregon.edu

www.pbis.org