evidence(based,reading,instruction,k(5, course,enhancement

Evidence-‐Based Reading Instruction K-‐5 Course Enhancement Module

Part 4: Supplemental Reading Interventions

Facilitator’s Guide

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.

CEEDAR Center Part 4: Supplemental Reading Interventions

1

Contents

Page

Introduction to the Evidence-‐Based Reading Instruction K-‐5 Course Enhancement Module ........ 2

Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 2

Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 3

Rationale ..................................................................................................................................... 3

Audience ..................................................................................................................................... 3

Facilitator’s Guide ....................................................................................................................... 4

Evidence-‐Based Materials .......................................................................................................... 4

Tiered Organization .................................................................................................................... 4

Resources ................................................................................................................................... 6

Materials ..................................................................................................................................... 6

In This Guide ............................................................................................................................... 7

Part 4: Slides and Supporting Facilitator Notes and Text ............................................................... 8

Disclaimer ..................................................................................................................................... 65

This facilitator’s guide is intended for use with the following resources: • Presentation slides • Participant handouts

These resources are available on the Course Enhancement Modules (CEM) web page of the CEEDAR Center website (ceedar.org).

CEEDAR Center Part 4: Supplemental Reading Interventions 2

Introduction to the Evidence-‐Based Reading Instruction K-‐5 Course Enhancement Module

The Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform (CEEDAR) Center developed this Course Enhancement Module (CEM) on evidence-‐based reading interventions to assist faculty at institutions of higher education (IHEs) and professional development (PD) providers in the training and development of all educators. This CEM provides information and resources about how to prepare teacher and leader candidates and current practitioners to create effective instructional environments for all students, including students with disabilities and their non-‐disabled classmates. This module helps educators appreciate that an effective instructional environment integrates a continuum of academic and behavioral interventions that are evidence based and accommodate the needs of each student in the class and school.

Through this CEM, participants will learn about intervention practices and assessments that can be integrated within a comprehensive, evidence-‐based reading intervention program. These tools and practices involve multiple levels of interventions, including class-‐wide, small group, and individual reading practices. Candidates who gain knowledge about how to effectively use these tools and practices will become proficient in using reading data to guide intervention decisions and designing reading interventions to align with the intensity of a student’s needs. The CEM guides candidates in becoming proactive, positive problem solvers who anticipate the needs of students and design interventions to reduce instances in which students are likely to experience academic failure.

Purpose This CEM was designed to build the knowledge and capacity of educators working with pre-‐service and/or in-‐service teachers teaching a diversity of students to read. The module can be adapted and is flexible to accommodate faculty and PD provider needs. The anchor module and speaker notes may be used in their entirety to cover multiple course or PD sessions. Alternatively, specific content, activities, and media can be used to enhance existing course and PD content.

CEEDAR Center Part 4: Supplemental Reading Interventions 3

Objectives At the completion of this CEM, participants will be able to:

1. Explain and model the components of effective instruction.2. Explain and implement the components of a multi-‐tiered system of supports (MTSS)

framework. 3. Discuss the research supporting the essential components of reading instruction.4. Use evidence-‐based teaching strategies to teach, model, and assess students in the

essential components of reading instruction. 5. Make instructional decisions based on reliable data.

Rationale It is the responsibility of teacher-preparation programs to develop highly qualified teachers who have in-depth knowledge of the science of teaching reading. Currently, too many teachers have limited in-depth knowledge of how to teach struggling students to read (Joshi et al., 2009).

It is urgent that the instruction of students is improved. The 2015 NAEP scores of fourth grade students was not significantly different in comparison to 2013; eighth grade students scored lower than in 2013 with only 36% of fourth graders and 34% of eighth graders at or belowproficient.

Children who do not learn to read well during the primary grades typically struggle in reading throughout their school years (Juel, 1988; Snow et al., 1998; Stanovich, 1986). In fact, nearly70% of older struggling readers fail to achieve reading proficiency (Biancarosa & Snow, 2004; NCES, 2011), and once poor reading trajectories are established, they are very difficult to change (Francis et al., 1996; Good et al., 2009). The negative consequences of reading failurecan be devastating and can lead to misconduct, grade retention, dropouts, and limitedemployment opportunities (Lyon, 2001). For these reasons, identifying effective methods forearly reading instruction and intervention for struggling students is critical.

Audience The audience is intended to be teacher and leader candidates within pre-‐service programs at the undergraduate or graduate levels, district teachers, practitioners, and leaders participating in in-‐service professional learning opportunities. The CEM could also be used for PD for current


4

teachers, practitioners, and leaders interested in staying abreast of current research and trends on best practices for students with disabilities and students who struggle. The facilitator’s guide serves as a blueprint to support faculty and PD providers. Facilitator’s Guide The facilitator’s guide consists of anchor presentation slides with a script to support facilitators as they present the content and learning activities within the presentation. Facilitator notes and talking points are included. The speaker notes are intended as a guide for facilitators using the PowerPoint slides and may be modified as needed. Reviewing the entire guide prior to facilitating the training is highly recommended. Evidence-‐Based Materials This anchor presentation was designed to align with the content of the innovation configuration, Evidence-‐Based Reading Instruction for Grades K-‐5 (Lane, 2014). All information and resources included in the CEM were drawn from PD products developed by U.S. Department of Education-‐sponsored centers and projects and other well-‐established and reliable sources. These centers and projects used a rigorous process to directly link their PD products to available research evidence on reading interventions following a multi-‐step process for product development (i.e., design, production, internal review, external review). Tiered Organization The learning resources are organized into four main parts:

• Part 1: Introduction. Part 1 introduces participants to the CEM with the purpose and rationale and then presents principles of effective instruction (i.e., explicit instruction, systematic instruction, multiple opportunities to practice, corrective feedback, progress monitoring).

• Part 2: Multi-‐Tiered System of Supports (MTSS). Part 2 explains the concept of MTSS and includes descriptions of the essential components of MTSS. These components include screening, progress monitoring, multi-‐level prevention systems, and data-‐based decision making.

• Part 3: Essential Components of Reading Instruction K-‐5. Part 3 introduces participants to the importance of implementing evidence-‐based reading instruction for all students, designing and differentiating instruction, and using assessment data to inform


5

instruction and monitor student progress. The module includes a knowledge survey for participants and is organized into sections detailing the five components of reading instruction: (a) phonemic awareness, (b) phonics, (c) fluency, (d) vocabulary, and (e) comprehension. There are multiple resources in these sections, including video examples, lesson activities such as the Alphabet Arc, Say it, Move it, comprehension strategy descriptions including Collaborative Strategic Reading, and participant quizzes.

• Part 4: Supplemental Reading Intervention. The purpose of Part 4 is to explain the purpose and rationale for supplemental reading interventions as part of a larger MTSS and in setting the groundwork for effective intensive intervention. Guidelines and an application activity are provided for selecting evidence-‐based interventions. Participants will analyze a video example of a supplemental reading intervention and consider the use of assessment data to evaluate the intervention. There is also a case study of a student in need of supplemental reading intervention.

• Part 5: Intensive Reading Intervention. Part 5 introduces participants to the intensive intervention framework that is individualized, more intense, substantively different in content AND pedagogy, and composed of more frequent and precise progress monitoring. The presentation and suggested activities allow participants to consider how to intensify reading interventions by increasing time, changing the learning environment, combining cognitive processing strategies with academic learning, and modifying the delivery of instruction. Participants are also introduced to a data-‐based instruction (DBI) approach to design and implement intensive reading interventions that accommodate the individual needs of non-‐responding students. Application of DBI is presented using a case study of a second-‐grader who may be in need of more intensive intervention and concludes with strategies for examining the impact of intensive reading interventions. As illustrated in Figure 1, the parts of this CEM are framed according to level of intensity. A complete table of contents and summary of handouts for each part is included at the end of this guide.


6

Figure 1. Evidence-‐Based Reading Instruction K-‐5 Anchor Presentation Structure Resources The following resources are provided for use in delivering the anchor presentation:

• Facilitator’s guide (this document) • Presentations • Participant handouts, as needed

All of these materials may be used and adapted to fit the needs of the training context. When sharing the content, please use the following statement: “These materials have been adapted in whole or in part with permission from the CEEDAR Center.” Materials The following materials are recommended for training and associated activities:

• Chart paper • Sharpie® markers for chart paper • Regular markers at each table for name cards • Post-‐it® Notes • Timer • Pens at each table

Necessary materials will vary based on the content and activities selected, which will depend on the audience and the format of the course or PD session.

Introducion Muli-‐Tiered System of Supports

Core Reading Instrucion WIth Differeniated

Support

Supplemental Reading

Intervenions

Intensive, Individualized

Reading Instrucion


7

In This Guide The rest of the guide provides the slides and speaker notes to support facilitators as they present the content and learning activities included in the anchor module. Reviewing the entire guide prior to facilitating the training is highly recommended. The table of contents for Part 4 follows, including a listing of handouts. Table of Contents

• What are Supplemental Interventions? • Elements of Supplemental Interventions • What Does Effective Supplemental Reading Instruction Look Like? • Progress Monitoring to Inform Instruction • Case Study: Abby • Data-‐Based Decision Making

Handouts

• Handout 1: Selecting an Evidence-‐Based Intervention • Handout 2: Effective Supplemental Instruction • Handout 3: Oral Reading Fluency • Handout 4: Small-‐Group Lesson Plan Template • Handout 5: Intensifying Supplemental Interventions • Handout 6: References


8

Part 4: Slides and Supporting Facilitator Notes and Text Slide 1—Course Enhancement Module: Reading K-‐5, Part 5 Part 4 of the Reading K–5 CEM provides an overview of supplemental instruction, often referred to as Tier 2 or secondary interventions. Materials needed: Ability to project videos with sound Chart tablets with markers Handouts: Handout 1: Selecting an Evidence-‐Based Intervention Handout 2: Ms. Pink Video Organizer Handout 3: Fluency Norms Handout 4: Lesson Plan Template Handout 5: Supplemental Needs Intervention Handout 6: References

Addressing)the)Needs)of)Students)With)Reading)Difficul8es)Through)Supplemental)Interven8ons)

Course)Enhancement)Module:))Reading)K–5,)Part)4)

H325A120003(


9

Slide 2—CEEDAR: Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability and Reform

Collabora'on)for)Effec've)Educator)Development,)

Accountability,)and)Reform)(CEEDAR))

H325A120003


10

Slide 3—Disclaimer To provide a systematic intervention model for both behavior and academics, most states have adopted a version of MTSS. MTSS programs are sometimes referred to as Response to Intervention (RtI); however, states and districts may have given them a local name (e.g., Response to Instruction, Problem Solving Model, Student Success Team). The key components of MTSS include . . . (read the list)

Disclaimer**This%content%was%produced%under%U.S.%Department%of%Educa8on,%Office%of%Special%Educa8on%Programs,%Award%No.%H325A120003.%Bonnie%Jones%and%David%Guardino%serve%as%the%project%officers.%The%views%expressed%herein%do%not%necessarily%represent%the%posi8ons%or%polices%of%the%U.S.%Department%of%Educa8on.%No%official%endorsement%by%the%U.S.%Department%of%Educa8on%of%any%product,%commodity,%service,%or%enterprise%men8oned%in%this%website%is%intended%or%should%be%inferred.%%

%


11

Slide 4—Primary Resources Materials from these websites are integrated throughout this CEM, and are cited on the appropriate slides. The references at the end contain additional resources utilized in the development of the CEM.

Primary'Resources'The$Na'onal$Center$on$Intensive$Interven'on$(NCII):$www.intensiveinterven'on.org$$Na'onal$Center$on$Response$to$Interven'on$(NCRTI):$h:p://www.r'4success.org$

The$IRIS$Center$for$Training$Enhancements.$(2008).$RTI$(part$4):$h:p://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/r'04Ialltogether/#content$

$


12

Slide 5—Supplemental Intervention Objectives As a result of studying this CEM, participants will be able to:

1. Describe the essential elements of supplemental interventions. 2. Explain the rationale for supplemental interventions. 3. Select interventions for supplemental Intervention. 4. Implement instruction with fidelity. 5. Use data to inform instruction. 6. Next steps: What do you do when the student is not successful

despite the supplementary intervention?

1.  Describe*the*essen.al*elements.**2.  Explain*the*ra.onale.*3.  Select*supplemental*interven.ons.**4.  Implement*instruc.on*with*fidelity.*5.  Use*data*to*inform*instruc.on.*6.  Next*steps.*

Supplemental*Interven.on*Objec.ves*


13

Slide 6—Essential Component: Screening

The goal of today’s session is to explain the purpose and rationale for supplemental interventions (a) as part of a larger multi-‐tiered system of supports (MTSS) and (b) in laying the groundwork for effective intensive intervention.

The information in this section of the PPT is taken from:

National Center on Intensive Intervention (October, 2013). Supplemental Interventions: Setting the Foundation for Intensive Support. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Intensive Intervention.

Supplemental*Reading*Interven2ons*


14

Slide 7—What Are Supplemental Interventions? Supplemental interventions are often referred to as Tier 2 instruction, secondary intervention, or supplemental interventions. The term used in this CEM is supplemental interventions. There are two types of supplemental interventions: standardized and individualized. Typically, supplemental interventions are standardized, evidence-‐based interventions or programs designed for at-‐risk students. The programs are often scripted and involve detailed lesson components and a specific scope and sequence. Some common examples of standardized reading supplemental intervention programs include Wilson Language System, Reading Mastery, and SRE Early Intervention in Reading. Gauge participants’ level of familiarity with supplemental interventions. Ask participants if supplemental interventions are used in their school/district and if so, how they refer to them. Ask participants to name examples of supplemental interventions that they use or know of; list these on a chart to refer to later in the presentation. Note: Some participants may not yet be working in schools. It possible, provide access to some common supplemental intervention programs for the participants to peruse. Later they will examine some programs to determine if the programs address the needs of certain students.

!  Standardized,+evidence.based+interven1ons+designed+for+at.risk+students.+++Tier+2,+Supplemental+interven1on,+Secondary+interven1on+

+

!  Specific,+targeted,+remedial+techniques.+++++++++(McCook,+2006)+++

!  Strategic,+purposeful+adult+ac1ons+that+prevent+learning+difficul1es+and+accelerate,+and/or+enrich+student+learning.+(Cappello,+et+al.+2008)

+++

What%Are%Supplemental%Interven1ons?%


15

Slide 8—Multi-‐Tiered System of Supports Note—MTSS is discussed in more detail in Part 2 of this anchor presentation. This slide serves as a review of this information. Supplemental Interventions are part of MTSS to prevent educational failure. A multi-‐tiered prevention system includes three or more levels of intensity or prevention. This triangle represents the model. The universal level (green), in which all students participate, includes high-‐quality core instruction in the general education class with differentiated instruction as needed. The goal of MTSS is to help every student access the grade-‐level standard in a very strong and effective core instructional program that is standards based, data driven, and responsive to student needs. At least 80% of students should be successful in the core program. The supplemental level (yellow), also known as secondary level, includes evidence-‐based intervention(s) of moderate intensity. Approximately 10-‐15% of students require this level of intervention. Students are taught in small groups of five to seven people, typically by the general education classroom teacher. Sometimes, a reading specialist may provide the supplemental instruction. The intensive prevention level includes individualized intervention(s) of increased intensity for students who show minimal response to secondary prevention. Intensive intervention typically involves small group instruction of one to three students who are significantly behind their peers. It is expected that about 5% of students will need intensive support.

Mul$%Tiered+System+of+Supports+

Supplemental+Level+of+

Preven$on+(~15%++of+students)+

++

+

Intensive+Level+of+

Preven$on+(~+5+%+of+students)+

!

Universal+Level+of+Preven$on+

(~80%+of+students)++++

(Filter et al., 2007; Kerr & Nelson, 2010)


16

Slide 9—Universal Instruction

Note—This slide will serve as a review for participants. It will help participants to understand the difference between universal and supplemental interventions/tiers. The universal tier is discussed in more detail in part three of this anchor presentation; intensive intervention is discussed in Part 5.

Let’s examine each tier in more detail.

Read this slide. Partner 1: summarize what the slides tell you about universal, or core, instruction.

Discussion points should include:

Universal prevention (also referred to as Tier 1 or core instruction) is high-‐quality core instruction that meets the needs of most students. You will see that the focus is on all students. The instruction is typically provided using a district-‐adopted curriculum and should include instructional practices that are research based and aligned with state or district standards. The setting for universal prevention is the general education classroom. All students receive screening and progress monitoring assessments as well as outcome measures or summative assessments, such as your annual state assessment.

Note that the focus of the universal instruction/tier is for ALL students, including those with disabilities, learning differences, or English language learners (ELLs). Teachers increase access for all students through

DESCRIPTION+

FOCUS+ All#students##

INSTRUCTION+ District#adopted#curriculum#and#instruc2onal#prac2ces#that#are#research#based,#are#aligned#with#state#or#district#standards#and#incorporate#differen2ated#instruc2on#

SETTING+ General#educa2on###

ASSESSMENTS+ Screening,#con2nuous#progress#monitoring,#and#outcome#measures#or#summa2ve#assessments#(used#sparingly)#################################(Na2onal#Center#on#Response#to##Interven2ons,#2013)#

+Universal+Instruc<on+

+


17

differentiated instruction, linguistically and culturally responsive practices, and the use of accommodations or modifications.

This may involve teacher-‐directed instruction combined with mixed instructional groupings, team teaching, peer tutoring, learning centers, and accommodations to ensure that all students have access to the instructional program. As I have mentioned, providing this differentiation and accommodations ARE NOT the same as providing more intensive interventions to students with learning disabilities. Differentiating instruction and providing scaffolds and accommodations are included in the core instruction that is provided for all students.


18

Slide 10—Supplemental Intervention Read this slide with your partner. Partner 2, summarize the content. Interventions at the supplemental tier address the learning or behavioral challenges of most at-‐risk students. These are for students who have been identified through screening as at risk for poor learning outcomes. The instruction is targeted, evidence based, and supplemental to core instruction. These interventions are delivered to small groups and also occur in either the general education classroom or another general education setting, such as an intervention block. Supplemental reading instruction is more explicit, systematic, intensive, and supportive with struggling learners receiving more instructional time than universal reading instruction The types of assessments used in the supplemental tier are the same as the universal tier and involve frequent progress monitoring (e.g., every 1-‐2 weeks) to track student progress and inform instruction.

DESCRIPTION+

FOCUS+ Students(iden*fied(through(screening(as(at(risk(for(poor(learning(outcomes(*Typically(15–20%(of(student(popula*on(

INSTRUCTION+ Targeted,(evidenceBbased(supplemental(instruc*on(delivered(to(small(groups(

SETTING+ General(educa*on(classroom(or(other(regular(educa*on(loca*on(within(the(school((

ASSESSMENTS+ Progress(monitoring,(diagnos*c,(screening!(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((Na*onal(Center(on(Response(to((Interven*ons,(2013)((

Supplemental+Interven;on+


19

Slide 11—Put Your Heads Together With your partner, create a graphic organizer to explain the similarities and differences between universal and supplemental instruction. You may use a Venn diagram or a T-‐chart, for example. Let me model one concept. Proceed to model on a chart tablet or board. I think I will use a Venn diagram. In the center, overlapping part of the circles, I will write “general education classroom.” Both levels typically take place in the general education classroom. Go ahead and complete your diagrams. If there is time, have a set of partners explain their diagram. Discuss any discrepancies they may have among the diagrams. Remember: Supplemental reading instruction is more explicit, systematic, intensive, and supportive with struggling learners receiving more instructional time than universal reading instruction. Supplemental instruction is conducted with small same-‐ability groups of three to five (if possible) students within or outside of the classroom setting. Supplemental instruction involves frequent progress monitoring (e.g., every 1-‐2 weeks) to track student progress and inform instruction.

How$does$supplemental$reading$interven0on$instruc0on$compare$with$universal$reading$instruc0on?$

Put.Your.Heads.Together.


20

Slide 12—Why Are Supplemental Interventions So Important? Why are supplemental interventions so important? By providing supplemental interventions to students who are identified as at risk, schools are able to effectively meet the needs of the majority of these students and begin to close the performance gaps that may exist between them and their grade-‐level peers. Because supplemental interventions are typically standardized and are often scripted and include resources, they provide a means for schools to meet the needs of at-‐risk students and allow resources (including teachers’ time) to be used more efficiently. Effective supplemental intervention programs provide teams with a more accurate picture of which students require intensive intervention. Most important, students make progress and master necessary skills. Failure to learn in the early grades often results in students getting further and further behind their peers, losing motivation to learn to read or even stay in school with each passing year.

•  Improves)the)achievement)of)students)at)risk)for)educa4onal)failure.)

•  Decreases)the)need)for)more)intensive)interven4ons)and)referrals)for)special)educa4on)services.)

•  Allows)for)efficient)use)of)4me)and)resources.)

))Na4onal)Center)on)Intensive)Interven4ons,)2013)

Why$Are$Supplemental$Interven2ons$So$Important?$


21

Slide 13—Elements of Supplemental Interventions Now we will discuss some key elements of supplemental interventions.

Elements(of(Supplemental(Interven2ons(


22

Slide 14—Supplemental Interventions Are . . . Supplemental interventions should be evidence based and also implemented with fidelity. Implementing with fidelity means that the teacher implements the program or intervention as it is written, using effective instructional principles such as explicit instruction with modeling and systematic instruction with scaffolding. Students are actively engaged, responding many times per minute. The teacher is well prepared and delivers the program at a quick pace, responding immediately with corrective feedback and reinforcing responses. Note to instructor: In the research these aspects are often referred to using the terms below. (Dane & Schneider, 1998; Gresham et al., 1993; O’Donnell, 2008)

2. Fidelity a) Adherence b) Student Engagement c) Program Specificity d) Quality of Delivery e) Exposure

1.  Based(on(evidence.(

2.  Implemented(with(fidelity.(

Supplemental*Interven.ons*Are*.*.*.*


23

Slide 15—Five Elements of Fidelity Interactive slide This graphic provides one example of how to think about fidelity, and it includes the elements of adherence, exposure, quality of delivery, program specificity, and student engagement.

Schools should have procedures in place to monitor the fidelity with which they implement supplemental interventions. Although these do not have to be formal, it is important to consider whether schools are implementing programs the way that they are intended to be delivered. In the midst of all the responsibilities of educators, small checks can make a big difference in keeping services for students on track. Note: The notes on each element of fidelity are animated to pop up with each click. Click ahead each time you discuss a new element of fidelity, and click again to close that element. 1. (Click) When we discuss adherence, we are focused on how well we stick to the plan/curriculum/assessment or whether we are implementing the plan/curriculum/assessment as it was intended to be implemented based on research. For a supplemental intervention, this may mean how well teachers implement all pieces of an intervention and whether they implement them in the way they were intended to be implemented. This does not necessarily mean that teachers should follow a script word for word, but covering certain content with appropriate pacing and relevant language and techniques is important. (Click)

Five%Elements%of%Fidelity%

(Dane & Schneider, 1998; Gresham et al., 1993; O’Donnell, 2008)

Adherence:!How!well!do!we!s)ck!to!the!plan,!curriculum,!or!assessment?!!

Exposure/Dura;on:!How!o7en!does!a!student!receive!an!interven)on?!How!long!does!an!interven)on!last?!!

Quality%of%Delivery:%How!well!is!the!interven)on,!assessment,!or!instruc)on!delivered?!Do!you!use!good!teaching!prac)ces?!

Program%Specificity:%How!well!is!the!interven)on!defined,!and!how!is!it!different!from!other!interven)ons?!

Student%Engagement:%How!engaged!and!involved!are!the!students!in!this!interven)on!or!ac)vity?!


24

2. (Click) Duration/Exposure refers to how often a student receives an intervention and how long an intervention lasts. While thinking about fidelity, we are considering whether the exposure/duration being used with a student matches the recommendation by the author/publisher of the curriculum. In the case of supplemental interventions, developers and researchers typically specify the required exposure/duration that is needed for the intervention to be effective for most students. If the intervention developer calls for the intervention three days a week, for 45 minutes each day, is the student receiving this dosage? (Click) 3. (Click) Not only is it important to adhere to the plan/curriculum/assessment, but it is also important to look at the quality of the delivery. This refers to how well the intervention, assessment, or instruction is delivered. For example, do you use good teaching practices? Quality instructional delivery also means that teachers are engaged in what they’re teaching and animated in their delivery, not simply reading from a script. Providing teachers with constructive feedback on their instructional delivery is one way to improve the quality of delivery for supplemental interventions. (Click) 4. (Click) Another component is program specificity, or how well the intervention is defined and how different it is from other interventions. Having clearly defined interventions/assessments allows teachers to more easily adhere to the program as defined. Is the intervention a good match for the student’s needs? Or does every low reader get the same intervention? (Click)


25

5. (Click) Just as the quality of the delivery is critical, it also is important to focus on student engagement or how engaged and involved the students are in the intervention or activity. Following a prescribed program alone is often not enough. Consider whether or not competing behaviors make it difficult for students to take part in the intervention as designed. During the delivery of supplemental interventions, teachers may need to use behavior management strategies to manage student behaviors, including providing choice, adding elements of competition, and offering frequent opportunities to respond. (Click) Slide 16—Evidence Standards This graphic illustrates an example of what a school’s reading instruction may look like at each tier. As you will see, the evidence standards for the instruction vary by tier. At the universal level, reading instruction consists of research-‐based curricula. This means that the core curriculums are not evidence based as a whole but typically include research-‐based strategies and practices such as explicit instruction and partner reading. Teachers use their judgment about which elements from the curriculum they choose to focus on, depending upon the needs of their students. At the supplemental (secondary) level, interventions should be evidence-‐based interventions, researched as a whole for their effect on student learning outcomes. This means that the research results from implementing the program are based upon all the components taught the way the program is designed.

Evidence(Standards(

(National Center on Intensive Interventions, 2013)


26

Finally, at the intensive level, a school should use an adapted evidence-‐based intervention. Adaptations should be based on data to meet the unique needs of that student. Perhaps this means that a student is receiving a supplemental intervention but with a greater frequency or with qualitative adaptations in the way instruction is delivered. Slide 17—Selecting Evidence-‐Based Interventions In order to ensure that a supplemental intervention program is evidence based, school teams should convene to review the existing research on that particular program. You can focus your efforts by looking at these areas when examining the evidence base:

• First, consider the type of information and source from which you are gathering this information. Is the information coming from the intervention vendor or a reputable website? Also ask yourself what type of evidence is available? Did the study involve experimental design, in which the intervention group was compared to an equivalent control group?

• Next, consider the population. For which populations has the program been researched and found effective? Is the sample described? Is the population similar to or representative of your student population? Are there different effects for different population groups?

• It is important to consider whether or not the desired outcomes assessed in a study are relevant to the outcomes you hope to achieve with an intervention.

•  Type/source.,

•  Popula0on.,

•  Desired,outcomes.,

•  Effects.,

Selec%ng(Evidence-Based(Interven%ons(

NCII,Interven0ons,Tools,Chart,h>p://www.intensiveinterven0on.org/chart/instruc0onalBinterven0onBtools,,

,What,Works,Clearinghouse,

h>p://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/findwhatworks.aspx,,

,Best,Evidence,Encyclopedia,h>p://www.bestevidence.org/,,


27

• Finally, consider the effects. Were the effects of the study large enough to be meaningful? Do students make significant achievement?

Sites including NCII’s Interventions Tools Chart, the What Works Clearinghouse, and the Best Evidence Encyclopedia all offer guidance when interpreting effect sizes. Slide 18—Essential Component: Evidence-‐Based Interventions This optional activity or homework assignment provides participants with an opportunity to practice identifying an appropriate evidence-‐based intervention for a student’s unique needs. Allot 15-‐20 minutes to complete the activity. Note: Make sure the Selecting Evidence-‐Based Interventions activity Handout 1 is available to participants. Participants will need access to the internet in order to complete this activity.

•  Select&a&supplemental&interven0on&to&review.&

•  Obtain&the&necessary&informa0on&online.&

•  Using&Handout&1,&evaluate&the&interven0on.&&

•  Share&your&results&with&another&pair&of&partners.&&

Ac#vity:)Selec#ng))Evidence1Based)Interven#ons)


28

Slide 19—A Caveat Perhaps in your school or district, pre-‐packaged evidence-‐based intervention programs are not available or the ones available do not address the needs of each student. Schools should use evidence-‐based intervention programs when available and consider augmenting current offerings if feasible. If evidence-‐based interventions are not available, consider using intervention materials that came with your core program materials or procedures and materials that are based upon research. Most important, always collect data to determine whether most students are profiting from the instruction you are providing. If the data reveal that most students are not profiting from your instruction, you will need to refine your instruction until you find that most students are profiting.

•  Commercial*programs*are*not*always*required.*

•  Consider*best*instruc7onal*prac7ces.*

•  Monitor*student*progress.*

*

A"Caveat"


29

Slide 20—What Does Effective Supplemental Reading Instruction Look Like?

What%Does%Effec-ve%Supplemental%Reading%%Instruc-on%Look%Like?%


30

Slide 21—Supplemental Instruction in Action! Make sure participants have Handout 2. Number off 1-‐4 to form groups of 4. We are going to watch part of a video (Miss Pink video) depicting a general education teacher working with a small group of struggling first graders. These students entered first grade not knowing letters or sounds. They had limited exposure to print of any kind. For the filming process, the small group is separated but in the real world, they were taught in a small group in the back of the room. We will just watch a small part of the video. Partner 1: On the handout, list the skills the teacher addresses. Partner 2: Note how the teacher engages the students. What activities does she utilize? Partner 3: Note how the teacher provides affirmative and corrective feedback. Partner 4: Note other effective teaching strategies the teacher implements. Note: Possible answers are on the following slide in the notes section.

Supplemental*Instruc/on***in*Ac/on!*(Handout*2)#

#1:#Skills#taught.#2:#Student#engagement.#3:#Feedback.#4.#Effec=ve#prac=ces.##


31

Slide 22—Supplemental Instruction

Supplemental*Instruc/on*

!

!!!!!!The!video!is!used!with!permission!from!the!University!of!Texas/Texas!Educa9on!Agency,!2014.!!


32

Slide 23—Discussion Allow the groups to share notes for about 3 minutes. Start with Partner 1 from one group to share out with a volunteer charting. Then, ask if anyone has anything to add. Move on to another group and have them address question 2 and chart responses, asking for additional observations. Continue until you have four charts, each one listing the observations of the participants. This is an example of an excellent, but not perfect, Tier 2, or supplemental intervention, instruction. Possible answer includes: 1. Phonological awareness: rhyming, syllable segmentation, compound words, elision, deleting initial blends, deleting final sound; graphophonemic awareness (names and letter sounds) with sound cards 2. Engagement: Multisensory engagement including: Cutting tools for syllable segmentation (tapping on arm) Building compound words Elision (deleting sounds) head, stomach, knees Multiple opportunities to practice 3. Feedback: Affirmative Praise: good job, thumbs up, awesome Immediate correction Try that again, try another one, clip Repeated “think about that” Keep on going, all the way down your body

Discussion(

•  Share&notes&in&groups.&

•  Whole&group&share.&

•  Reflect&upon&effec6ve&prac6ces.&


33

Zipping zipper 4. General teaching practices: Models activities Individual responses (OK in small group, not in a large group) Students repeated word before manipulating the word Well prepared Pacing Slide 24—Five Essential Reading Components All supplemental reading interventions should support the core curriculum and target one or more of the essential reading components (listed on the slide). The check marks on this slide indicate which grade levels the specific reading components should be taught. Upon which areas did this teacher focus? Yes, phonological awareness, including phonemic awareness, and phonics. If we watched the entire video, you will see her move to reading words with fluency. Note—The five essential reading components were discussed in greater detail in part three of this anchor presentation.

Five%Essen)al%Reading%Components%

Supplemental*instruc/on*incorporates*a*reading*interven/on*program*that*targets*the*essen/al*reading*components:*

K 1 2 3 •  Phonemic%Awareness%%% %√ √ •  Phonics% √ √ √ √ •  Fluency% √ √ √ •  Vocabulary% √ √ √ √ •  Comprehension% √ √ √ √ National Reading Panel, 2000; Texas Education Agency, 1998


34

Slide 25—What to Teach It is important to identify which skills to focus on during supplement instruction. You do this by analyzing student performance using data from the universal screener and benchmark assessments teachers administer. Part 3 presented data from Ms. Corbett’s class. See Attachment 3B. You will notice that five students—Abby, Harry, Russell, Viola, and William—were identified as needing supplemental instruction, based on how they performed. The teacher grouped Abby, Viola, and William together and provided an intervention and monitored their progress. Viola and William responded to the supplemental intervention, but Abby did not. Now the teacher has to decide what to do Let’s look at some things the teacher must consider.

What%to%Teach?%

•  Analyze(data(from(assessments.(

•  Align(with(core(curriculum.(

•  Adjust(when(data(indicate(progress(is(not(adequate.(


35

Slide 26—Supplemental Intervention Considerations Review information on the slide. With your partner, create questions a teacher may need to ask when thinking of these considerations. For example, for the first item, Who receives instruction, a teacher may ask: What assessments should I use to determine whether or not a student is making adequate progress? How is adequate progress defined? What if there is not enough time to meet in small groups with all the students who need help? Partner B, please scribe.

Supplemental*Interven.on*Considera.ons*

Who receives instruction Students who are not making adequate progress with Universal instruction

Amount of daily instruction Instruction may vary, depending on the age of the student, from 30–45 minutes per day (+ Universal): Younger students (e.g., kindergartners) have shorter attention spans and might require shorter amounts of time (e.g., 30 minutes) Older students are able to attend for longer amounts of time (e.g., 30–45 minutes)

When instruction is provided Scheduling options for supplemental could include: Taking time from two consecutive classes (e.g., 15 minutes from social studies and 15 minutes from science) Taking time from “specials” (e.g., music, library, art) In the event that a large percentage of students requires supplemental, the teacher might need to schedule more than one supplemental intervention period per day

http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti03-reading/cresource/how-is-high-quality-instruction-integrated-into-the-rti-approach/rti03_11/


36

Slide 27— Supplemental Intervention Considerations Review information on the slide with your partner and again, create questions a teacher may ask. Partner A, please scribe. For example, a teacher may ask: Who does the progress monitoring? If I assess the students, what are the other students doing while I am testing? Provide another 3-‐5 more minutes. Whole Group Discussion: Chart the questions and lead a discussion about them. Have the participants brainstorm answers. However, some questions they will not be able to answer without more information about the students, teachers, or school setting. Circle those questions. Remember, most schools have a problem-‐solving team or student study team, a team of teachers, specialists, administrators, and sometimes parents who discuss these questions and arrive a consensus as to what is best for the student. It is important to ask questions and to think creatively. Questions the participants or instructor may raise include the following. Instructor: be sure you know the answers or can guide the participants to find the answers and local district policy about their multi-‐tiered system of support.

1. Who decides when a student is eligible for supplemental instruction?

2. What if most of my class is struggling and needs extra help? 3. There is no time during the day for me to work with small groups

of students. What do I do?

Supplemental*Interven.on*Considera.ons*

Duration of instruction 10 weeks–20 weeks: The number of weeks may vary, but a minimum of 10–12 weeks is recommended. Students may need an additional round of Supplemental intervention.

Frequency of progress monitoring At least one time every 1–2 weeks

Who provides instruction Trained personnel may include: General education teacher Reading specialist Paraprofessionals Other personnel

Where students are served Within or outside the general education classroom

http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti03-reading/cresource/how-is-high-quality-instruction-integrated-into-the-rti-approach/rti03_11/

http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti03-reading/cresource/how-is-high-quality-instruction-

integrated-into-the-rti-approach/rti03_11/


37

4. What if I notice a student is way behind and may be in need of special education services? Do I have to complete 12 weeks of supplemental instruction before referring the student for evaluation?

5. Where can I find tools for progress monitoring? How do I use the data? Can I keep informal records?

6. I am having enough challenges teaching my core curriculum. I do not have experience working with students who struggle. Who can help me learn how to teach all students?

7. One small group I have is very distractible. May I work with that group in the library if I can cover my class? Or could a paraprofessional work with the group?

8. Where do I find materials that appropriate for all these small groups? I want to target the skills that the students need, but I don’t have time to make all the materials myself.

9. How can I use centers to reinforce the supplemental instruction? 10. May I use computer programs to reinforce skills instead of me

teaching the students?


38

Slide 28—Progress Monitoring to Inform Instruction

Progress'Monitoring'to'Inform'Instruc1on'


39

Slide 29—Progress Monitoring The purpose of progress monitoring is to monitor students’ responses to universal, supplemental, and INTENSIVE instruction. Progress-‐monitoring data can be used to 1) estimate the rates of improvement, which allows for comparison to peers; 2) identify students who are not demonstrating or making adequate progress so that instructional changes can be made, and 3) compare the efficiency of different forms of instruction; in other words, which instructional approach or intervention led to the greatest growth among students. PROGRESS MONITORING is not just for those students identified for supplemental instruction. The focus is on students who have been identified through screening as at risk for poor learning outcomes. This could include students just above the cut score as well as those scoring below the cut score. The cut score is the score below which students need intervention. The cut score is determined by each campus based on the resources of the schools and student needs. Progress-‐monitoring tools, just like screening tools, should be brief, valid, reliable, and evidence based. Common progress-‐monitoring tools include general-‐outcome measurements, including curriculum-‐based measurements and mastery measurements. The same tool that was used for screening can be used for progress monitoring as well so that you can compare a student’s progress from the baseline data. The timeframe for progress-‐monitoring assessment is dependent on the tools used and the typical rate of growth for the student. Progress monitoring can be used anytime throughout the school year. With

Progress'Monitoring'PURPOSE:((

•  Monitor(students’(responses(to(instruc6on.(•  Es6mate(rates(of(improvement.(•  Iden6fy(students(who(are(not(progressing.(•  Compare(different(forms(of(instruc6on.(

FOCUS:(iden6fy(students(at(risk(TOOLS:((brief(valid,(reliable,(evidence(based.(TIMEFRAME:(regular(intervals((e.g.,(weekly,(biweekly,(monthly)(

Center(on(Response(to(Interven6on,(2013(


40

progress monitoring, students are assessed at regular intervals (e.g., weekly, bi-‐weekly, monthly) to produce accurate and meaningful results that teachers can use to quantify short-‐ and long-‐term student gains toward end-‐of-‐year goals. At a minimum, progress-‐monitoring tools should be administered at least monthly. However, more frequent data collection is recommended given the amount of data needed for making decisions with confidence (six to nine data points for many tools). With progress monitoring, teachers establish long-‐term (i.e., end-‐of-‐year) goals indicating the level of proficiency students should demonstrate by the end of the school year. Slide 30—Why Progress Monitor? Progress-‐monitoring data is used to place students in intervention groups or decide which interventions work best for your groups. Monitor the progress students receiving supplemental instruction at least once a month. Use these data to determine whether students still require intervention. Progress-‐monitoring assessments allow us to gauge students’ progress. For example, within MTSS models, progress-‐monitoring assessment results are used to make a series of decisions that move students between more and less intensive levels of intervention. Research has demonstrated that when teachers use progress monitoring for instructional decision making, students learn more, teacher decision-‐making improves, and students are more aware of their own performance.

Why$Progress$Monitor?$

Data$allow$us$to…$

Es,mate$the$rates$of$improvement$(ROI)$

across$,me.$

Compare$the$efficacy$of$different$forms$of$

instruc,on.$

Iden,fy$students$who$are$not$demonstra,ng$adequate$progress.$

Determine$when$an$instruc,onal$change$is$

needed.$

30

Center on Response to Intervention, 2013


41

Slide 31—Identify Students Not Making Adequate Progress We can also see improvement by looking at trend lines in comparison to their goal lines. On the graph on the left, the trend line is steeper than the goal line. The student is showing increasing scores; therefore, the student is making adequate progress and the end-‐of-‐year goal may need to be adjusted to provide more of a challenge. On the graph on the right, the trend line is flatter than the goal line. The student is not profiting from the instruction, and, therefore, the teacher needs to make a change in instructional program. Remember, you never lower the goal. Instead, the instructional program should be tailored to bring a student’s scores up so the scores match or surpass the goal line.

Iden%fy(Students(Not(Making(Adequate(Progress(

I""""""""""Increasing"Scores:"!

X

goal line

trend line X

goal line

trend line

Flat Scores:

X

X

X XX X

wor

ds

Wor

ds


42

Slide 32—Progress Monitoring Answers the Questions In summary, progress-‐monitoring data can help answer these questions.

1. Are students making progress at an acceptable rate? It is not enough to make progress. The progress must be meaningful and sufficient to close the gap between the student’s progress and that of his/her peers.

2. Are students meeting short-‐term goals, which will help them reach their long-‐term goals?

3. Does the instruction need to be adjusted or changed? Using pre-‐established data decision rules, progress monitoring allows you to determine if the instruction is working for the student and evaluate the effectiveness of changes.

Progress'Monitoring'Answers'the'Ques1ons'

'•  Are$students$making$progress$at$an$acceptable$rate?$

•  Are$students$mee5ng$short7$and$long7term$performance$goals?$

•  Does$the$instruc5on$or$interven5on$need$to$be$adjusted$or$changed?$


43

Slide 33—Focus of Progress Monitoring The focus is on those students who have been identified through screening as at risk for poor learning outcomes. Progress monitoring can help confirm or disconfirm the results of the screening. You can also choose to progress monitor students just above the cut score, not just those below the cut score, to identify potential students who were actually at risk but not identified.

Focus&of&Progress&Monitoring&&

! Students(iden*fied(as(at(risk(for(poor(learning(outcomes(

(

Image(courtesy(of([renjith&krishnan](/(FreeDigitalPhotos.net(


44

Slide 34—Progress-‐Monitoring Tools Note—If participants are not working in schools, omit the first bullet for this activity. Participants must have access to a computer to complete this activity. It can be assigned as a homework assignment as well. Allow 10-‐15 minutes for teams to look more closely at the Progress Monitoring Tools Chart, either online if computers are available, or printed copies. The time for this team time activity will depend of the needs of the group. If time allows, consider having two or three teams share their tools and the evidence they found that supports their validity and reliability.

Progress'Monitoring,Tools,

Review&Progress,Monitoring&Tools&Chart&h5p://www.r:4success.org/progressmonitoringtools&

Ac#vity(–(Choose(2(progress3monitoring((assessments(you(think(may(be(appropriate(for(students(at(the(third3grade(level.(Research(the(publisher,(purpose(of(the(assessment,(cost,((training(required,(reliability,(and(the(validity(of(those(assessments.(


45

Slide 35—Use Assessment Data to Inform Supplemental Interventions Read slide and discuss. What does it mean to scaffold instruction? Instructional scaffolding is a learning process designed to promote a deeper level of learning. Scaffolding is the support given during the learning process, which is tailored to the needs of the student with the intention of helping the student achieve his/her learning goals (Sawyer, 2006).

Use$Assessment$Data$$$to$Inform$Supplemental$

Interven4ons$•  !Group!students.!•  !Set!individual!student!goals.!•  !Plan!targeted!instruc5on.!•  !Scaffold!instruc5on.!


46

Slide 36—Progress-‐Monitoring Tools Note—If participants are not working in schools, omit the first bullet for this activity. Participants must have access to a computer to complete this activity. It can be assigned as a homework assignment as well. Allow 10-‐15 minutes for teams to look more closely at the Progress Monitoring Tools Chart, either online if computers are available, or printed copies. The time for this team time activity will depend of the needs of the group. If time allows, consider having two or three teams share their tools and the evidence they found that supports their validity and reliability.

Progress'Monitoring,Tools,

Review&Progress,Monitoring&Tools&Chart&h5p://www.r:4success.org/progressmonitoringtools&

Ac#vity(–(Choose(2(progress3monitoring((assessments(you(think(may(be(appropriate(for(students(at(the(third3grade(level.(Research(the(publisher,(purpose(of(the(assessment,(cost,((training(required,(reliability,(and(the(validity(of(those(assessments.(


47

Slide 37—Case Study: Meet Abby We met Abby in Part 3 of this module. She was struggling in first grade and not making much progress. Now, she is in beginning second grade, and she is still struggling.

Case%Study:%Meet%Abby%

Abby$is$a$second-grade$student$who$is$struggling$with$reading.$She$reads$word$by$word,$rarely$corrects$mistakes,$and$comprehends$li;le.$


48

Slide 38—Abby, continued

!Abby!is!not!making!sa.sfactory!progress!at!the!universal*level*of!instruc.on,!even!though!her!teacher!differen.ates!for!her.!The!teacher!has!tried:!•  Books!on!tape.!•  Partner!reading.!•  Reading!to!Abby.!•  Teaching!irregular!words.!•  Teaching!making!inferences.!


49

Slide 39—Abby’s DIBELS Scores Ms. Corbett asked the reading specialist for help. Together, they analyzed Abby’s scores on the DIBELS that Ms. Corbett administered last week. Ms. Corbett knew Abby’s oral reading fluency (ORF) was low, but now, she realized that Abby struggled with letter sounds, particularly short vowel sounds, and blending sounds to read words with automaticity. Abby often sounds out the first letter of a word and then guesses about the rest of the word. For example, most words that start with d she reads as dad, even if it doesn’t make any sense. No wonder Abby can’t read fluently! Ms. Corbett decides to place Abby in a supplemental intervention group. What skills should she work on with Abby? Screening Measures—Brief assessments that focus on critical reading skills that predict future reading growth and development, conducted at the beginning of the school year to identify children likely to need extra or alternative forms of instruction. (Kame’enui, 2002) ORF focuses on two of the components of fluency: rate and accuracy. A teacher listens to a student read aloud from an unpracticed passage for 1 minute. At the end of the minute, each error is subtracted from the total number of words read to calculate the score of words correct per minute (WCPM). Note to Instructor: see the DIBELS Next Benchmark Goals and Composite Score document available from http://dibels.org DIBELS Composite Score: A combination of multiple DIBELS scores, which provides the best overall estimate of the students’ reading proficiency. For information on how to calculate the composite score, see the document listed above.

Abby’s&DIBELS&Scores&

Benchmark **Goal**Composite * *141**Le6er7Sounds *54**Words*Read*13**ORF * * *52*

Abby’s*Scores**111**34**6**32*

DIBELS Next Benchmark Goals: http://dibels.org/


50

Benchmark Goal: Students scoring at or above the benchmark goal have the odds in their favor (approximately 80%-‐90%) of achieving later. Slide 40—Abby’s Fluency Goal Distribute the fluency Handout 3 Activity—Complete the activity on the slide with a partner. Example Fluency Goal (See next slide) Short term Abby will read second grade text at 47 words correct per minute (Nov.), 63 words correct per minute (Jan.), and 80 words per minute (April). Long term Abby will read second-‐grade level text fluently at 90 words correctly per minute with 95% accuracy.

Abby’s&Fluency&Goal&

•  With%a%partner,%using%the%table%of%oral%reading%fluency%norms,%create%long8%term%and%several%short8term%fluency%goals%for%Abby.%%

•  Refer%to%Handout%3.%


51

Slide 41—Sample Long-‐ and Short-‐Term Goals for Abby Discuss Abby’s short-‐ and long-‐term goals. You may use your district’s fluency goals, the goals from an assessment you utilize (AIMSweb or DIBELS), or the Fluency Norms Chart (Handout 3).

Sample'Long,'and''Short,Term'Goals'for'Abby'

•  Short'term'goals: ''o Abby$will$read$second0grade$text$at$47$words$correct$per$minute$(Nov.),$63$words$correct$per$minute$(Jan.),$and$80$words$per$minute$(April).$

•  Long'term'goal>'o Abby$will$read$second0grade0level$text$fluently$at$90$words$correctly$per$minute$with$95%$accuracy.$


52

Slide 42—Abby’s Intervention What are some other interventions that may improve Abby’s fluency?

• Read aloud to model good fluency. • Books on tape. • Reader’s theatre. • Use poetry books for repeated and phrased readings. • Timed repeated readings. • Use research-‐based programs (e.g., Read Naturally, Hasbrouck et

al. 1999), Reading Assistant: http://www.scilearn.com/products/reading-‐assistant)

• Do you think that Abby’s intervention will help her achieve her fluency goal? Would you make any changes? Explain.

Abby’s&Interven-on&

Small%group%repeated%readings%% Group Size Frequency Duration Provided by

2-5 students

2 times per week

20 minutes Classroom teacher


53

Slide 43—Explore Resources With your partner, explore these three resources and select four to five activities that would be most beneficial for Abby.

Explore(Resources(

•  The$Reading$Con-nuum$Handout$$•  $The$Meadows$Center$

h6p://www.meadowscenter.org/files/resources/ReadingStrategiesDyslexia.pdf$

•  Florida$Center$for$Research$in$Reading$$h6p://www.fcrr.org/curriculum/pdf/$$$$GKF1/P_Final_Part2.pdf$

$$


54

Slide 44—Lesson Planning Imagine you are Abby’s classroom teacher. With a partner, using the lesson plan handout (Handout 4), create a lesson plan for Abby that will help her with fluency. Remember, before Abby can read with fluency, she needs to learn to read short vowels and sound out and blend whole words. Note: Participants can also do this individually as a homework assignment. Make sure participants have some time to share their lesson plans with the group. Lesson plans can be copied and distributed to participants. Resources (on previous slide)

• The Reading Continuum handout • The Meadows Center:

http://www.meadowscenter.org/files/resources/ReadingStrategiesDyslexia.pdf

• Florida Center for Research in Reading: http://www.fcrr.org/curriculum/pdf/

• O’Connor, R. E. (2007). Teaching word recognition: Effective strategies for students with learning difficulties. New York, NY: Guilford.

• Haager, D., Dimino, J. A., & Windmueller, M. P. (2014). Interventions for reading success (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Lesson&Planning&

•  Create&a&lesson&plan&to&address&Abby’s&needs&and&help&her&move&toward&reaching&her&fluency&goal.&

•  Refer&to&Handout&4.&


55

Slide 45—Data-‐Based Decision Making There is a population of students for whom supplemental interventions will not be sufficient. These students will require intensive intervention. However, for intensive interventions to function effectively and efficiently, it is important to make sure that a solid foundation of supplemental interventions has been established.

Data$Based)Decision)Making)


56

Slide 46—Progress Monitoring Curriculum-‐based measurements (CBM) Use of CBM procedures to assess individual progress in acquiring reading skills has a long history and strong support from numerous empirical research studies (Fuchs et al., 2001). CBM progress monitoring typically involves having a student read an unpracticed passage selected from materials at that student’s grade level (for those reading at or above expected levels) or at a goal level (for students reading below expected levels). An individual progress-‐monitoring graph is created for each student. Each time the student is assessed, that score is placed on the graph. If three or more consecutive scores fall below the aim line, the teacher must consider making some kind of adjustment to the current instructional program (Hasbrouck, Woldbeck, Ihnot, & Parker, 1999).

Progress'Monitoring'

Oral%reading%fluency%curriculum0based%monitoring%(CBM)%passages%at%her%instruc<onal%grade%level%will%be%given%to%Abby%once%a%week.%%%%%


57

Slide 47—Progress Monitoring: Abby’s Reading Fluency Data This graph shows Abby’s reading progress-‐monitoring data using Passage Reading Fluency, with scores in correct words read per minute. The first three scores, before the first vertical line, show her baseline reading fluency assessments. The X on this line shows her average baseline score. This score is connected with her target score, the X on the far right, to form the goal line. The second set of scores was collected during Abby’s time in supplemental intervention. You can see that all of these scores are below the goal line, suggesting that Abby is not responding to the secondary intervention and that she requires an instructional change (the dotted vertical line) to make progress.

Progress'Monitoring:''Abby’s'Reading'Fluency'Data'

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Num

ber o

f wor

ds re

ad co

rrec

tly in

1 m

inut

e

Date

Baseline

Goal Line

Initial Instruction

Instructional Change

47


58

Slide 48—Next Steps Additional Information: At the end of 6 weeks, the classroom teacher examined all of Abby’s progress-‐monitoring data, and Abby did not reach her goal. Discussion Questions: What additional information do you need to decide possible next steps for Abby? Explain. Possible responses:

• Review the reading continuum and Abby’s assessments to determine if the teacher needs to teach more basic skills, such as phonemic awareness or letter sounds, in more depth.

• Consider increasing the time Abby spends reading aloud, either with a partner, into a tape recorder, or with an adult.

What are some possible next steps for Abby? Explain. • Increase the number of times Abby receives intervention instruction

(dosage) to 4 days per week. • Increase the amount of time of each session. • Provide additional opportunities for Abby to practice. • Utilize appropriate computer programs to allow Abby more

practice opportunities reading words with short vowel sounds. • Decrease the number of students in the group with Abby.

Next%Steps%%

•  At#the#end#of#six#weeks,##progress3monitoring#data#informa6on#shows#that#Abby#is#not#making#progress.#

•  Discuss#some#possible#next#steps#to#address#Abby’s#needs.#


59

Slide 49—What If Supplemental Interventions Are Not Sufficient? As mentioned, there is a percentage of students for whom evidence-‐based interventions delivered with fidelity will not be sufficient. These students require more individualized support. For these students, intensive intervention is recommended. Intensive intervention should be delivered to students with the most severe and persistent learning needs. Data-‐based individualization (DBI), discussed in detail in the intensive section of this anchor presentation, can be used with students requiring intensive interventions.

What%If%Supplemental%Interven1ons%Are%Not%Sufficient?%

National Center on Intensive Intervention October, 2013


60

Slide 50—Consider . . . In most cases, we would not determine that a student requires data-‐based individualization until we have evidence that she or he is not responding to supplemental intervention. Key questions in reviewing this evidence include:

§ Has the student been taught using an evidence-‐based supplemental intervention program (if available) that is appropriate for his or her needs? The supplemental intervention should match the student’s identified needs.

§ Has the program been implemented with fidelity? Fidelity addresses whether the intervention is being delivered as planned.

• Content. Are all key components being delivered per instructions?

• Dosage/schedule. Has the intervention been delivered as intended in terms of frequency and length of sessions?

• Group size. Is the group the size recommended by the intervention developer? You may also want to consider the group composition—do these students have similar needs that match the intervention? Do any students have competing behavior issues?

§ Has the program been implemented for a sufficient amount of time to determine response? Consider this question in terms of how long the intervention is intended

Consider).).).)•  Has$the$student$been$taught$using$an$appropriate$

evidence3based$supplemental$interven6on$program?$

•  Has$the$teacher$received$training?$•  Has$the$program$been$implemented$with$fidelity?$

o  Content.$o  Dosage/schedule.$o  Group$size.$

•  Has$the$program$been$implemented$for$a$sufficient$amount$of$6me$to$determine$response?$

$


61

to be implemented and also in terms of having enough data to detect a change in performance.

Slide 51—Intensifying Interventions When supplemental interventions are insufficient for meeting student needs, teachers should make adaptation to intensify the intervention. After making these adaptations, teachers should continue to collect progress-‐monitoring data to determine if the adapted intervention is sufficient in meeting the student’s need. Some examples of adaptations include:

• Decrease group size. • Increase frequency/duration of sessions. • Change interventionist to someone with greater expertise. • Break tasks into smaller steps, compared to less intensive levels of

instruction/intervention. • Provide concrete learning opportunities (including role play and

use of manipulatives). • Use explicit instruction and modeling with repetition to teach a

concept or demonstrate steps in a process.

Intensifying*Interven-ons*

•  Decrease'group'size.'•  Increase'frequency'or'dura5on'of'sessions.'•  Provide'more'opportuni5es'for'prac5ce'with'feedback.'

•  Change'interven5onist'to'someone'with'greater'exper5se.'

•  Break'tasks'into'smaller'steps.'•  Provide'concrete'learning'opportuni5es.'•  Use'explicit'instruc5on'and'modeling.'


62

Slide 52—Prioritizing Next Steps . . . It can be helpful for school or district teams to prioritize areas of focus and plan next steps related to improving supplemental interventions. The Supplemental Interventions Needs Inventory handout is meant to guide teams in their reflection on current supplemental intervention practices. After completing this short needs inventory questionnaire, teams should share their responses and then meet with leadership to prioritize and plan for their next steps related to improving supplemental interventions. You may decide to pause and give teams time to complete the Supplemental Interventions Needs Inventory or recommend that they complete this after the training. Be sure the have copies of this handout on hand. DOES THIS NEED TO BE DISCUSSED FURTHER? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE INTRODUCED AT THE BEGINNING? COULD IT BE USED AS AN ORGANIZER FOR THIS PART? Note – If participants are not working in schools, explain how this needs inventory can be helpful to them in the future and give them a copy of it to use at a later date. Image courtesy of Renjith Krishnan / FreeDigitalPhotos.net.

•  Complete(the(Supplemental(Interven1ons(Needs(Inventory((Handout(5).(

•  Share(responses(as(a(team.(Priori1ze(and(plan(for(next(steps(with(district(or(school(leadership(or(coach.(

Priori%zing)Next)Steps).).).))


63

Slide 53—Supplemental Interventions . . . In summary, implementing effective supplemental interventions is crucial for schools to establish a foundation for intensive intervention. When supplemental interventions are evidence based and implemented with fidelity, schools are able to meet the needs of most at-‐risk students and obtain a clearer sense of which students require intensive interventions. Furthermore, the way supplemental interventions are implemented has important implications on identification of students. IDEA regulations for identifying students with specific learning disabilities no longer require the use of the discrepancy model and allow for the use of a process based on the child’s response to scientific, research-‐based intervention. With this in mind, it is crucial for schools to have effective systems for evidence-‐based supplemental interventions in place because a child’s responsiveness to these interventions has a large impact on their identification and future services.

!

•  Set$the$founda,on$for$intensive$interven,on.$

•  Should$be$evidence$based.$

•  Must$be$implemented$with$fidelity.$

•  Have$important$implica,ons$for$iden,fica,on$of$students$who$need$more$intensive$instruc,on.$

Supplemental!Interven.ons!.!.!.!


64

Slide 54—Thank You!

!!

References!are!provided!in!Handout!6.!!Part!5!addresses!intensive!interven6ons.!

Thank&You!&


65

Disclaimer Although the content of the anchor module was developed and reviewed by content experts, the structure of the content and skills across and within parts are merely suggestions based on the expertise of the authors. Therefore, users should take the structure as a recommendation and should modify and use as deemed appropriate for the target audience.

evidence(based,reading,instruction,k(5, course,enhancement

Documents