r t i

Response to InterventionResponse to Intervention(RTI)(RTI)

Amy Piper, Ed.S., NCSPSchool Psychologist

CSE ChairpersonCertified AIMSweb Trainer

Fredonia Central SchoolFredonia, NY

Introduction

• Overview of school background

• Overview of professional experiences

Agenda• Introduction• Overview of RTI—some practical guidelines• BREAK• Problem Solving Teams and Research Based

Interventions• LUNCH• Classification of students through

RTI• SUMMARY

Learning DisabilitiesLearning Disabilities

• 50% of students in Special Education are eligible under LD category (2.9 million nationwide)

• 80% of those are eligible in the area of Reading.

• Numbers grown over 300% since 1975

• Most reading difficulties originate from poor instruction, lack of reading readiness, and/or cultural differences…

Changing School DemographicsChanging School DemographicsDiverse SES status: School learning is affected

Hart, B., & Risley, R. T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Learning DisabilitiesLearning Disabilities

• Recent studies have shown that when students with severe reading problems are given early, intensive instruction, nearly 95% can reach the national average in reading ability!

The Science of Reading

The Importance of Reading

• The key to realization of dreams for many children• Essential for academic success• Reading problems have consequences all across

development• Reading is acquired and must be taught• Progress must be monitored frequently and

effectively to ensure success(Shaywitz, 2003)

THE Best Way to Monitor

Curriculum-Based Measurement• SCIENTIFICALLY-BASED• Relies on ongoing measurements of reading

fluency • Establishes how fast student is acquiring new

knowledge• Measures how well a child has learned what he

has been taught(Shaywitz, 2003)

CBM-Reading

• Growth or lack of growth is clearly visible• Can track fluency rates as an objective measure to

identify if a child is responding to a particular instructional approach

• Rate of growth compared to norms• Don’t have to wait for end of school year to learn

about progress

(Shaywitz, 2003)

CBM-Reading

• Growth is greatest in early school years• Growth is at max at beginning of year

• Fluency is the critical marker for permanency• A fluent reader has formed permanent and perfect

models of words in his automatic word form system for reading.

(Shaywitz, 2003)

Rate of Expected Weekly Reading Growth

(Increase in Correct Words per Minute)

Grade Realistic Ambitious

1 2.00 3.00

2 1.50 2.00

3 1.00 1.50

4 .85 1.10

5 .50 .80

6 .30 .65(Shaywitz, 2003)

Fluency

Reading a word accurately, quickly, smoothly, and with good expression.

Fluency

• Fluency is acquired by practice, by reading a word over and over again.

A reader must have four or more successful encounters with a new word to

be able to read it fluently.

(Shaywitz, 2003)

Fluency

Once a word can be read fluently, the reader no longer has any need to rely on context

Fluency

• Studies in which eye movements of readers are tracked have shown that a skilled reader pauses at between 50 and 80 percent of the words in a text.

• He needs to fixate on the words,essentially to scan them in, but does so very, very quickly because the words—their spelling patterns and pronunciations—are well known to him.

(Shaywitz, 2003)

Fluency

• In addition to reading words accurately and quickly, a skilled reader understands what he read.

• Reading Comprehension develops gradually so that, over time, the balance tips from learning mostly from listening to learning through reading.

(Shaywitz, 2003)

Poor Readers

• Inability to read fluently• Devote their full concentration to decoding words

instead of attending to issues of comprehension• Reflecting lack of fluency, they read slowly.• Fluency binds a reader to text—if can’t read

fluently, cannot engage the text.

(Shaywitz, 2003)

Poor Readers

• Must devote all their attention to decoding the words on the page

• More vulnerable to any noises or movement• Reading is fragile, so any sound or movement

threatens ability to maintain reading• Relies on brute memorization of words due to lack

of mastery of phonetic code

(Shaywitz, 2003)

Testimony to the President’s Commission on Excellence in

Education

When teachers use progress monitoring to inform their instructional planning, students make greater academic gains.

President’s Commission, cont.

• More than 200 empirical studies published in peer-review journals– Provide evidence of CBM’s reliability and

validity for assessing the development of competence in reading

– Document CBM’s capacity to help teachers improve student outcomes at the elementary grades

(Fuchs and Fuchs, 2002)

President’s Commission, cont

AT PRESENT, CBM is the MOST conceptually sophisticated, technically sound, and thoroughly researched progress monitoring system available.

(Fuchs and Fuchs, 2002)

Research demonstrates that when teachers apply decision rules to CBM graphs, they raise goals more often and develop higher

expectations

(e.g., Fuchs, Fuchs, and Hamlet, 1989a),

they modify their instructional programs more frequently

(e.g., Fuchs, Fuchs, and Hamlet, 1989b),

And they effect stronger student achievement

(e.g., Fuchs, Fuchs, Hamlett, and Stecker, 1991).

Naysayers of CBM

Some practitioners remain unconvinced of CBM as a valid measure of general reading achievement

Teacher Resistance

• Expressed presumption that R-CBM is solely a measure of decoding skills

• Lacks face validity

• Argue that R-CBM will overestimate reading skills and not be sensitive to reading difficulties

Teacher Resistance

• Reading-CBM most highly related measure (.91) to reading comprehension on Stanford Achievement Test (SAT)

• R-CBM correlated significantly higher to SAT comprehension than SAT decoding!

Anti-CBM???

• Is there a type of student, i.e, the “word caller”?

• Can these students read text aloud fluently, but don’t understand what they read?

Word-Callers

Word calling occurs when the words in the text are efficiently decoded into their spoken forms without comprehension of the passage taking place

(Stanovich, 1986)

Word-Callers

• Research results did not confirm that

students that word-call

and similarly fluent peers

read equally well

(Hamilton, Shinn, 2002)

Word Callers

Word callers read fewer correct words per minute and were significantly different on the 3 other comprehension measures

(Hamilton, Shinn, 2002)

Word-Callers

Teachers are most inaccurate in prediction of “word-caller” students’ oral reading

scores.

(Hamilton and Shinn, 2002)

Teacher Perception

• Teachers using terms accuracy and fluency synonymously

• Accuracy is critical in the early grades, but fluency gains importance as a child matures

• Children learn to read a word accurately and then, after much practice, fluently

• Fluency describes how a skilled reader reads aloud

Fluency

• Fluency is acquired word by word, reflecting the words a child has read and fully mastered

• Accuracy is a necessary precursor to fluency, accuracy does not necessary evolve into fluency

• Fluency is the ability to read a text quickly, accurately, and with good understanding.

• It is the hallmark of a skilled reader.• Children who are fluent readers love to read.

(Shaywitz, 2003)

English Language Learners

• There is a strong relation of R-CBM as a measure of general reading proficiency with English Language Learners.

• Correlations are comparable for both ELL and English-only students on R-CBM and criterion reading measures

(Baker and Good, 1995)

Using CBM in the classroom

• Consider setting up one area of the classroom for assessment

• Material for probes should be organized and available

• People other than the teacher may administer the probes

(Pemberton, 2003)

Resources• Fuchs, L. and Fuchs, D. (2002) Progress

Monitoring, Accountability,and LD Identification Testimony to the President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education.

• Hamilton, C. and Shinn, M. (2002). Characteristics of Word Callers: An Investigation of the Accuracy of Teachers’ Judgments of Reading Comprehension and Oral Reading Skills.US Department of Education, Office of Special Education Research, Washington, DC.

• Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming Dyslexia. NY:Alfred A. Knopf Press.

All laws not created equal…All laws not created equal…

• There are 50 state definitions in addition to the federal definition for LD.

• Attempts to assess for LD involved a vast array of methods used to determine intelligence.

• James Yssseldyke, a researcher at the University of Minnesota, concluded that 80 percent of all school children in the United States could qualify as learning-disabled under one definition or another. (Shapiro et. al., 1993)

• Eligibility rules often appeared class-based. Though unintentional, they sadly discriminated against low SES groups whose learning problems originated from "environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage."

• Though Federal regulations from 1970’s mandated use of the Discrepancy Mode, it was essentially poorly researched, if at all.

• Used as a method to create a criteria for eligibility for LD and cap the number of students who were eligible for services.

Shapiro, J. P., Loeb P., Bowermaster, D. (1993, December 13). Separate and unequal. U.S. News & World Report, 47.

All laws not created equal…All laws not created equal…

• There are 50 state definitions in addition to the federal definition for LD.

• Attempts to assess for LD involved a vast array of methods used to determine intelligence.

• James Yssseldyke, a researcher at the University of Minnesota, concluded that 80 percent of all school children in the United States could qualify as learning-disabled under one definition or another. (Shapiro et. al., 1993)

• Eligibility rules often appeared class-based. Though unintentional, they sadly discriminated against low SES groups whose learning problems originated from "environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage."

• Though Federal regulations from 1970’s mandated use of the Discrepancy Mode, it was essentially poorly researched, if at all.

• Used as a method to create a criteria for eligibility for LD and cap the number of students who were eligible for services.

Shapiro, J. P., Loeb P., Bowermaster, D. (1993, December 13). Separate and unequal. U.S. News & World Report, 47.

“According to the Children's Defense Fund, middle-class children starting first grade have been exposed to 1,000 to 1,700 hours of one-

on-one reading, while their low-income counterparts have been exposed to only 25

hours. It's little wonder that so many of these kids get referred to special ed.”

(Washington Monthly, June 1999)

Identifying Key Concerns with Identifying Key Concerns with Previous IDEA LawPrevious IDEA Law

• For years, researchers have advocated for a change to the “discrepancy model” (a.k.a. “wait to fail model.”)

• Misidentification of LD = greater # of students in special education services (300% + since 1975)

• “Sympathy” eligibility

• Eligibility as a “back-up plan” for limited reg. ed. services

Changing the way we ID…LD!Changing the way we ID…LD!New flexibility with IDEIA:

“In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, an LEA shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability.”

• Law now provides districts/LEAs the option to eliminate IQ-discrepancy requirements

• Embraces model of prevention—not failure• Students with disabilities are considered general education students first with

interventions beginning in the general education classroom.• Mandates that students cannot be identified as LD if they have not had

appropriate instruction in reading, meaning research-based, scientific interventions.

IMPLICATIONS:• General ed. must assume active responsibility for delivery of

high-quality instruction, interventions, and prompt ID of at-risk students collaboratively.

• Special Ed must partner with gen. ed. to provide those interventions early on.

IDEIA REQUIRES:IDEIA REQUIRES:

Assessment tools and strategies are provided that directly assist in determining the educational needs of the child.

Proposed Regulations in IDEIA:Proposed Regulations in IDEIA:The criteria to be considered for adoption by the States: 1) May prohibitprohibit the use of a severe discrepancy between

intellectual ability and achievement2) May not requirenot require the use of a severe discrepancy

between intellectual ability and achievement3)3) MustMust permitpermit the use of a process that determines if the

child responds toresponds to scientific, research-based interventionscientific, research-based intervention as part of the evaluation proceduresas part of the evaluation procedures

4)4) May permitMay permit the use of other alternative research-based procedures for determining SLD

• “Team members” has been replaced with the term “group members”

• The group is collectively qualified to:

1) conduct individual diagnostic assessments in speech and language, academic achievement, intellectual development, and social-emotional development;

2) interpret assessment data, and apply critical analysis to that data

• “Team members” has been replaced with the term “group members”

• The group is collectively qualified to:

1) conduct individual diagnostic assessments in speech and language, academic achievement, intellectual development, and social-emotional development;

2) interpret assessment data, and apply critical analysis to that data

Assessment data will involve pre-referral RTI procedures +

other diagnostic tests.(I.E., CBM/DIBELS and

traditional tests as needed)

So…

…now what do we do?

Setting up the RTI Setting up the RTI Model in SchoolsModel in Schools

What an RTI Model looks like in schools.

How to make RTI work.

Comparing Old and New Paradigms:

Discrepancy Model• Discrepancy between IQ and

Achievement scores• “Magic Number” eligibility• Geographic eligibility• Inconsistent regression• Discriminatory for some

students• Difficulty with ELL’s• Attendance discrimination

RTI Model• Funding for intervention services

increased.• Provision for some special education

services to be provided to reg. ed students (i.e., Resource staff “ok” to work with reg. ed. Kids during RTI process.)

• Dual discrepancy model applied• Instructional integrity• No broad-scope attendance

discrimination• Ideal for ELL eligibility determination• Geographic Eligibility phenomenon

reduced.

RTI Learning Objectives:

• Review What Design Elements Must Be In Place for Successful RTI

• Describe the Role That Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) Can Play In Determining:

• Universal Screening and Progress Monitoring

• Dual Discrepancies: Educational Need Rate of Progress for Students Entering the RTI Process

• Evaluating the Effects of Intervention Eligibility determination

Early Intervening Services ProvisionEarly Intervening Services Provision: : What IDEIA Now ProvidesWhat IDEIA Now Provides

• Greater emphasis on use of early interventions (research-based)

• School districts will be able to use up to 15% of their total IDEIA federal funds for early intervening services

These services are to be provided BEFORE they are identified as having a disability. LEAs have option to conduct this activity.

• Funding may be used for professional development, academic and behavioral supports.

RTI: Official Permission for Needs-Based Service Delivery

One approach to RTI—4 Tier Model

Tier 4—CSE or 504 studentsMonitored several times weekly

Tier 3—1:2 or 1:3 instruction(remedial reading, AIS, AST)Monitored weekly

Tier 2—Small Group instruction (remedial reading, AIS, AST)Monitored bi-weekly or monthly

Tier 1—Universal screening General Education Curriculum

CLCS’ approach to RTI—4 Tier Model

Tier One—Universal ScreeningFall--All students pre-kindergarten through 1st grade

receive early literacy assessmentPre-K: Get it, Got it, Go! Assessment:

One minute Picture Naming task to measure vocabulary knowledge

Two minute Alliteration task to measure oral recognition (with visual cue) of initial sounds

Two Minute Rhyming task to measure oral rhyming skills (with visual cue)

Tier One

• Sample Picture Naming Stimulus Card

• Front

• Back

Tier One

• Pre-Kindergarten– Alliteration sample cards

– Rhyming sample cards

Dog Frog

Get it, Got it, Go!

Get it Got it Go! is part of the Center for Early Education Development in the College of Education and Human Development at the University of Minnesota.

Get it Got it Go! is funded by the U.S. Department of Education.

Get it, Got it, Go!

How to access more information and download materials:

http://ggg.umn.edu/

Tier One

Fall-Kindergarten Universal Screening

AIMSweb Early Literacy Assessments:

www.aimsweb.com

One Minute Letter Naming Fluency (LNF)

One Minute Letter Sound Fluency (LSF)

Examiner Copy:

AIMSweb® Letter Naming Fluency - Benchmark Assessment #1 (Kindergarten - Fall)

Given To: Given By: Date:

U D P S R A X y l n / 10 (10)

C V g W A G J z c E / 10 (20)

Student Copy:

u D P S R A X y l n

C V g W A G J z c E

/ Copyright 2003 Edformation, Inc. All rights reserved.

Examiner Copy:

AIMSweb® Phoneme Segmentation Fluency - Benchmark Assessment #1 (First Grade - Fall)

Given To: Given By: Date:

sort /s/ /or/ /t/ weight /w/ /ai/ /t/ / 6 (6)

match /m/ /a/ /ch/ touch /t/ /u/ /ch/ / 6 (12)

meal /m/ /ea/ /l/ bee /b/ /ea/ / 5 (17)

put /p/ /uu/ /t/ trees /t/ /r/ /ea/ /z/ / 7 (24)

/ Copyright 2003 Edformation, Inc. All rights reserved.

Tier One

Fall-First Grade Universal Screening

AIMSweb Early Literacy Assessments:

One Minute Letter Naming Fluency (LNF)

One Minute Letter Sound Fluency (LSF)

One Minute Phonemic Segmentation Fluency (PSF)

One Minute Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)

Tier OneFall--All students kindergarten through 1st

grade receive early numeracy assessment

AIMSweb Early Numeracy Assessments:

One minute Oral Counting FluencyOne minute Number Identification Fluency

One minute Missing Number FluencyOne minute Quantity Discrimination Fluency

Tier One

Winter and Spring--All students in

kindergarten receive early numeracy assessment

www.aimsweb.com

Early Numeracy Cover Sheet

Quantity Discrimination

7 4 1 4

“Look at this piece of paper in front of you. The box in front of you has two numbers in it (demonstrate by pointing). I want you to tell me the number that is bigger.”

Tier One

Fall, Winter, and Spring Benchmark—All students grade 2nd through 8th grade receive

oral reading fluency assessment

AIMSweb Reading-Curriculum Based Measurement:

(measured by words read correct and errors in one minute)

Tier One

Winter--All students pre-kindergarten and kindergarten receive early literacy

assessmentPre-K: Picture Naming, Rhyming,

AlliterationKindergarten: Letter Naming Fluency,

Letter Sound Fluency, Phoneme Segmentation Fluency

Tier One

Spring--All students pre-kindergarten and kindergarten receive early literacy assessment

Pre-K: Picture Naming, Rhyming, Alliteration

Kindergarten: Letter Naming Fluency, Letter Sound Fluency, Phoneme Segmentation Fluency,

Nonsense Word Fluency

Tier One

Fall, Winter, and Spring Benchmark—All students grade 2nd through 5th grade receive

math computation fluency assessment

AIMSweb Math-Curriculum Based Measurement:

(measured by digits correct in two minutes on grade-level computation problems)

Tier One

Winter, and Spring Benchmark—All students in 1st grade receive math computation

fluency assessment

AIMSweb Math-Curriuculum Based Measurement:

(measured by digits correct in two minutes on grade-level computation problems

Tier Two

Strategic MonitoringEach elementary classroom teacher does monthly progress monitoring in reading of 1-2 children that

are borderline average range based on national AIMSweb data.

We don’t want to wait for benchmark assessment to ensure that they are making the progress they need

to make!

Tier Two

If children indicate at Tier One that they are below expectations for their grade

level, they move to Tier Two!Referral typically is made by classroom teacher…

Tier Two

Small Group instruction

Remedial reading, AIS, ASTWith research-based interventions

Monitored bi-weekly or monthly

By remedial reading teacher or AIS teacher

Tier Three

If children indicate at Tier Two

(through progress monitoring of reading or math skills)

that they continue to remain below expectations for their

grade level,

despite research-based interventions

and monthly IST meetings,

they move to Tier Three!

Referral is typically made by classroom teacher through IST process….

Tier Three

1:2 or 1:3 instruction

Remedial reading or AISWith research-based interventions

Monitored weeklyBy reading teacher or AIS teacher

Tier Four

If children indicate at Tier Three

(through progress monitoring of reading or math skills)

that they continue to remain below expectations for their

grade level,

despite research-based interventions

and monthly IST meetings,

they move to Tier Four!

Referral is typically made by classroom teacher through IST process….

Tier Four

CSE or 504 studentsResearch-based interventions implemented

through resource room, Consultant Teacher model, AIS, or Remedial

Reading

Monitored several times weekly

Tier Four

If the student continues

to have difficulty

making progress,

Case Manager refers them to

Instructional Support Team

Or CSE review

Design Elements Integral to RTI Process

• Proactive System Design: A blueprint or model• Effective and Efficient Teams• A Range of Evidence-Based Interventions/Instruction• Procedural Standard Protocols-- Organizing and Documenting Critical

Tasks• Initial Planning• When Intervention is Required

1. Efficient and Economical Assessment That Provides• Preventive Progress Monitoring • Universal Screening • Identifying Educational Need• Sensitive Progress Monitoring

2. Reports Documenting/Summarizing the Process and Outcomes

Critical Components of Critical Components of Initial ReferralInitial Referral

– Documenting/Describing Referral– Parental Notification– Problem Identification Interviews w Teacher(s) and

Parents– Describing and Observing Current Intervention– Observing Student-Teacher Interactions– Collecting Information on Current Educational Need

• Performance Discrepancies • Rates of Progress

– Data-Based Decision on Need for Revised Intervention

Critical Components of Intervention– Plan Intervention schema– Support and Implement Intervention– Observe Implementation and Fidelity of

Treatment– Develop/Implement Progress Monitoring System– Implement Progress Monitoring Decision– Data-Based Decision on Response to Initial

Intervention, Severity of Educational Need, or Need for Revised Intervention

RTI Begins with Using CBM in RTI Begins with Using CBM in Benchmark AssessmentBenchmark Assessment

Frequent Evaluation (3 times per year) of Growth and Development Using R-CBM:

Initial Performance Assessment (IPA) or “Taking Inventory” at the Beginning of the School Year

1. Identify Students At Risk

2. Instructional Planning

3. Initial Data Point for Progress Monitoring

Accountability

– NCLB and AYP

– Linkages to State Standards

Formative Assessment

Formative Assessment: Formative Assessment: Process of assessing student achievement Process of assessing student achievement duringduring instruction to determine whether an instructional program is instruction to determine whether an instructional program is effective for individual students.effective for individual students.

• When students are progressing, keep using your instructional

programs.

• When tests show that students are not progressing, you can change your instructional programs in meaningful ways.

• Has been linked to important gains in student achievement (L. Fuchs, 1986) with effect sizes of .7 and greater.

Systematic formative evaluation requires the use of:

Standard assessment tools…

1. That are the same difficulty

2. That are Given the same way each time.

Using Benchmark Assessment for SYSTEMATIC Proactive, Early Identification

of At Risk Students

Benchmark (Universal) Monitoring of Progress for All Students

Benchmark (Universal) Screening:

Educational Need?

Billy: Benchmark (Universal) Screening

Educational Need?

Benchmark Assessment Supports Identifying “Dual Discrepancies”

Data-Based Decision Making Begins by Looking for Dual Discrepancies:

1. Educational Need (Discrepancy from Other Students), and

2. Lack of Significant Improvement with “Standard” Intervention — General Education Program

Benchmark Progress Monitoring: Educational Need?

Benchmark Progress Monitoring: DUAL DISCREPANCY & Educational

Need?

Dual Discrepancy and Need for RTI?

Dual Discrepancy and Need for RTI?

Benchmark Progress Monitoring: Educational Need?

Educational Need?

Using CBM at the Point of Referral

• Benchmark Assessment Brings Existing Data to the Student Support Team/Child Study Team

• Not All Students Must Endure RTI — Severe Problems Warrant Immediate Service Need Decisions

• Strategies Other than Benchmark Assessment May Be Required

Conducting a Survey Level Assessment

John5th grader:

5th grade passage

26/12

John4th grade passage

49/7

John3rd grade passage

62/4

Use SLA to Prioritize How Students Can Be Managed

Can We Provide Interventions to Allow Student to Benefit from General Education?

About a Year Behind — Can We Provide Support to Allow Student to Benefit from General Education?

More Severe Educational Need

Determining intensity-of-need for RTI: Referred Students

• Keep It Simple for Less Severe Problems — Use Next Benchmark

• Set Individualized Goals for Progress

• Create an Intervention Specific Progress Monitoring Context

Benchmark Can Document RTI (mild)

Benchmark Insufficient: Move to Strategic Monitoring (1x/month)

Intensive Progress Monitoring & Goal Setting

Current Goal Setting Practices Are Unsatisfying!

Do you like these IEPs?I do not like these IEPsI do not like them Jeeze LouiseWe test, we checkWe plan, we meetBut nothing ever seems complete.Would you, could youLike the form?I do not like the form I seeNot page 1, not 2, not 3Another changeA brand new boxI think we allHave lost our rocks!

Need Shift to Few But Important Goals

Often Ineffective Goal Smorgasboard! • Student will perform spelling skills at a high 3rd grade level.• Student will alphabetize words by the second letter with 80% accuracy.• Student will read words from the Dolch Word List with 80% accuracy.• Student will master basic multiplication facts with 80% accuracy.• Student will increase reading skills by progressing through Scribner with

90% accuracy as determined by teacher-made fluency and comprehension probes by October 2006.

• To increase reading ability by 6 months to 1 year as measured by the Woodcock Johnson.

• Student will make one year's growth in reading by October 2006 as measured by the Brigance.

• Student will be a better reader.• Student will read aloud with 80% accuracy and 80% comprehension.• Student will make one year's gain in general reading from K-3.• Students will read 1 story per week.

Comply with RTI & IDEIA: Ensure the Goals are Measurable and Linked to Validated Formative Evaluation Practices

• Have few, but important goals.

• Goals should be based on quality tests like CBM.

• Based on validated practices such as how often, how many samples, etc.

• Base Goal Setting on Logical Educational Practices

Reduce the Number of Goals to a Few Critical Indicators

Reading In (#) weeks (Student name) will read (#) Words Correctly in 1 minute from randomly selected Grade (#) passages.

Spelling In (#) weeks (Student name) will write (#) Correct Letter Sequences and (#) Correct Words in 2 minutes from randomly selected Grade (#) spelling lists.

Math Computation In (#) weeks (Student name) will write (#) Correct Digits in 2 minutes from randomly selected Grade (#) math problems.

Written Expression In (#) weeks (Student name) will write (#) Total Words and (#) Correct Writing Sequences when presented with randomly selected Grade (#) story starters.

When Strategic Monitoring Insufficient…Move to Intensive Progress Monitoring

Formative Evaluation: Are data and a goal enough?

Formative Evaluation: Are data, goals & trends enough?

Formative Evaluation is Impossible without all data:Goals Make Progress Decisions Easier

Positive Response to Intervention

Not Responding to First Intervention

Better Response to Intervention

A common approach to problems:Our Beach Ball Analogy to

remediation.Sometimes we know there’s a hole…

..but we don’t know were it is or cannot see it.

So we throw patches at the problem…

…But we wind up using a lot of expensive patches and spend a lot of time patching…

…yet, it still didn’t fix the hole.

Sometimes we’ve found the hole…

..but we don’t know how to fix it.

We need to identify where the hole is first… …and patch it properly.

This means that the intervention is the right size and type to fix the problem.

It should also be of quality and monitored over time to ensure that it “sticks.”

Interventions—Some thoughts…

Interventions/instruction: Proper diagnostic work must be done first. This is a 2-part process:

– Children with academic difficulties have “Swiss cheese” knowledge. Unless we know where the “holes” are, we can never fill them via appropriate instruction.

– Unless we understand the purpose and scope of the intervention, we cannot determine if it will “fill the holes” in the child’s knowledge.

Special Education Eligibility “We’ve tried ‘everything’ and

I think the only way to fix it is….”

…This sounds as if your car is destined for nothing but expensive repairs.

(Doesn’t this sound familiar?)

But what if your car was But what if your car was simply simply out of gas?out of gas?

Simple and thorough Simple and thorough diagnostics DONE FIRST diagnostics DONE FIRST would have saved you a lot would have saved you a lot of money and time!of money and time!

SUMMARY: Interventions, Instruction, and

Eligibility for Special Programs “Referral is often more a reflection of

teacher stress than a result of carefully diagnosed student learning deficits.”

Richardson, Casanova, Placier, and Guifoyle (1989)

1. Without the proper diagnostics initially, we cannot sufficiently determine whether Special Education or other restrictive programs are the only options.

2. We need to determine the proper intensity of intervention and feasibility of maintaining that intervention over the long-term in general education setting.

3. Determine educational benefit of interventions (after proper diagnostic assessment is done) through formative assessment.

Thank you!