rti in practice: systems change in the hiawatha valley education district (hved) 2010 mspa midwinter...
TRANSCRIPT
RtI in Practice: Systems Change in the Hiawatha Valley Education District
(HVED)
2010 MSPA Midwinter Conference
Dan Hyson, Data Management Coordinator
Lisa Skifton, Lead School Psychologist
Hiawatha Valley Education District, Winona, MN
Background on HVED• Cooperative serving ~21,000 students• 15 districts and 5 charter schools in SE MN
Agenda
1. How did HVED start transitioning to RtI?2. What have HVED’s goals been in this transition?3. What has this transition looked like in our schools?
a. What has been the role of the school psychologist?
4. What training, support and resources has HVED provided to the schools?
5. What evidence does HVED have that our transition has been effective?
6. What challenges has HVED experienced and what tips can we provide to others?
7. Questions
1. How did HVED start transitioning to RtI?
1. How did HVED start transitioning to RtI?
• George Batsche trained HVED staff and other district staff on RTI-2004 & 2006
• Kerry Bollman from SCRED trained HVED staff on the problem solving process-2005
• Data Management Coordinator position started in fall 2006-established a data warehouse of all students in HVED
• AIMSweb benchmark data 3x/year, NWEA MAP tests, MCA-II
2. What have HVED’s goals been in this transition?
• Series of 3 grants from Minnesota Department of Education beginning in December 2006
• 5 pilot districts: Winona, Plainview-Elgin-Millville, Caledonia, Lewiston-Altura and Lake City
2. What have HVED’s goals been in this transition?
• Grants 1 and 2– Implement research-based instruction with
fidelity– Identify students not making progress and
modify instruction– Make research-based interventions more
readily available – Decrease number of students placed in
special education
2. What have HVED’s goals been in this transition?
• Grant 3– Help problem solving teams access, interpret and use
data from benchmark screenings and progress monitoring to identify and implement instructional changes
– Implement research-based interventions with fidelity in both general ed and special ed
– Identify reliable measure of fidelity of implementation – Increase parent communication – Once demonstrate readiness, begin to make eligibility
decisions based on data collected during interventions
3. What has this transition looked like in our schools (e.g., Winona Area Public Schools)?
• Reading Specialists hired in 2006
• Job description included working with students and training regular ed. teachers on strategies/interventions
• Behavior Interventionist hired in 2009 to provide consultation services to teachers
3. What has this transition looked like in our
schools (e.g., Winona Middle School)? • 5th grade teachers trained in 6-Minute
Solution, Read Naturally, and REWARDS• House system for team planning time• AIMSweb benchmarks-fluency and maze • 30-Minute Tier 2 reading interventions
done daily • Monthly data meetings-discuss progress
monitoring data to determine changes in intervention
3. What has this transition looked like in our schools (e.g., Winona Middle School)?
• Rocket Math done daily in all 5th grade classrooms (math fact fluency)
• Working on training 5th grade teachers in TransMath for differentiated math instruction next year (math calculation and reasoning)
3. What has this transition looked like in our schools (e.g., Rollingstone Elementary)?
• Survey of research-based interventions that teachers are trained in, and interventions they are using
• All teachers are using PALS math and PALS reading (Tier 1)
• Individual teachers supplementing with Tier 2 interventions (Earobics, Sound Partners)
School Psychologist’s Role
• Establish regularly-scheduled team meetings to discuss data
• Schedule/Facilitate trainings for teachers• Organize AIMSweb benchmark testing• Help administer AIMSweb fluencies/enter in
data, interpret data for teachers• Lead discussions on how to use data for Tier 2/3
interventions• Help teachers access specific intervention
resources
Change in School Psychologist Role with transition to RTI
• Fewer referrals for evaluations
• Teachers do problem solving on their own
• Gather data on groups of students
• Interpret data on groups of students to help teachers facilitate group interventions
4. What training, support and resources has HVED provided to the schools?
• Access to information about research-based interventions– Summer Symposia– Links to national website clearinghouses– Local intervention database
• RtI readiness checklists
• Data and instructional coaching
HVED Summer Symposia
• Nationally-recognized researchers• Every year since 2002 • 4-5 days in August during week before teacher
workshops• For General Ed, Special Ed and administration• Started with training in research-based reading
interventions• Now expanded to include math interventions and
positive behavior interventions
Links to national website clearinghouses
• What Works Clearinghouse - ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/
• Florida Center for Reading Research - www.fcrr.org/FCRRReports/LReports.aspx
• Intervention Central – interventioncentral.org
5. What evidence does HVED have that our transition has been effective?
• Increased teacher awareness of research-based interventions
• Increased use of technology tools to access data used in RtI process
• Decrease in percent of students found eligible for Specific Learning Disability services
Increased teacher awareness of research-based interventions
Increased use of technology tools to access data used in RtI process
Percent of HVED member district staff using data warehouse at least 1x/month
19%
50%
70%
6%
23%
45%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
General Ed teachers
Other admin/studentsupport services
Principals/Psychs/DACs
Spring 2008
Spring 2009
Decrease in percent of students found eligible for Specific Learning Disability
services - all HVED Districts
Grant districts*
* Winona, Lake City, Lewiston-Altura, Caledonia, PEM
HVED v. State average % in Special Ed overall
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
State % in Special Ed 11.6 11.8 12 13.4 12.4 12.8 12.8 13 13.3 13.4 13.6
HVED % in Special Ed 11.2 11.9 11.9 12.1 12.4 13.1 12.6 12.5 12 12 12
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
6. What challenges has HVED experienced and what tips can we provide to others?
Pros/Cons at the elementary level
• Pros: teachers taking ownership of students, willingness to do interventions at all three tiers, small school, small class sizes, reading specialist consultation services (providing resources and interventions)
• Cons: lack of follow through on some behavior plan rewards
Pros/Cons at the middle school level
• Pros: team planning time, 5th grade Rocket Math (universal), buy-in on the effectiveness of the interventions, teachers entering own benchmark data and using data-based decision making
• Cons: no system for Tier 3 interventions-these are done on an individual basis, teachers with higher kids resist monthly meetings, 6th-8th grade teachers resisting doing any systematic interventions, no universal long-term vision/plan, lack of principal involvement
7. Questions?
Contact information
Dan Hyson
507-452-1200, ext. 119
Lisa Skifton
507-494-1013