Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriate Referrals

Dr Laura W Simmons Special Population CoordinatorMcKinney ISD

Special Populations Department510 Heard Street

McKinney TX 75069469-742-6329

lsimmonsmckinneyisdnet

Background

McKinney ISD is a suburban school district with a population of 22000 students

Approximately 85 of these students meet criteria for Special education

4 Years ago our school district began to implement an Rti framework with students referred for LD and OHI special education assessment once Tier 3 supports were documented and found not to meet the studentrsquos needs

Background Continued

As we grew as a district with our Rti process it became evident that some type of district-wide fidelity process was needed especially due to the number of LD amp OHI referrals that continued to be recommended by campus Rti teams that often resulted in the student not qualifying for LD andor OHI

Variations across campuses was quite evident as to what constituted a ldquogood referralrdquo

In the meantime our district adopted a hybrid problem-solving approach which included the continuation of a campus student support team for our Tier 3 process Additionally there were elements of protocol-prescribed interventions build into the Tier plan as well

Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process

We considered many avenues but wanted a process that could qualitatively conceptualize these elements

What did seem most feasible was a process in which a district-level team would look closely at each FIE referral made on the campus level prior to consent being obtained utilizing key indicators to engage conversation

Thus the advent of the MISD District Fidelity Review Team The next step was to establish a protocol for conducting the District

Fidelity Review team

Having a consistent and detailed measure of fidelity of implementation

supports the efficacy of an Rti model

--D Mellard amp E Johnson Rti A Practionerrsquos Guide to Implementing Response to Intervention 2008 Corwin Press

Development of the MISD DFR Process

We chose to utilize a standard review process that included a specific documentation form used for all students reviewed by the team

We looked at various modelshellipwe werenrsquot quite ready as a district to pursue more formal fidelity checks district wide but found at least one guiding document that had key ideas that would apply to our needs New Mexico Public Education Department Response to

Intervention A Systematic Process to Increase Learning Outcomes for All Students (featured in The Answer Book on Rti ldquoRti Fideltiy Review Checklistrdquo c 2007 LRP Publications)

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

Our next step was deciding upon the key elements that would need to be considered Evidence of scientifically-based interventions Fidelity of interventions Progress Monitoring Data Consideration of Exclusionary Factors Consideration of Determinant Factors Additional Recommendations or Actions such as

including two prong consideration

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

We developed a uniform worksheet that would be utilized for each studenthellip

LEPELL Yes No

Initial Referral

Yes No Suspected Disability

Review of Tier 3Also-see attached written summary of screening data and educational history provided by the campus

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Evidence-based Interventions The student has received evidence-based small-group instruction for at least 6-8 weeks andor appropriate PBS planNotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Fidelity of intervention The intervention(s) was (were) implemented with fidelity for this student (including core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies)Notes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Progress Monitoring Data Weekly curriculum-based measuresprogress monitoring measures were implemented for at least 6-8 weeks Data from CBMsPGMs are consistent with the area(s) of concern established by the campus RTINotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Data-Based Decision Making The studentrsquos individualized or small-group interventions were reviewed revised andor discontinued based on student performance and progress after 6-8 week intervalsNotes

District Fidelity Review Worksheet Example

Evidence of scientifically-based interventions

In our district we have a recommended protocol for Tier 3 for addressing academic concerns

We do ask that the student be afforded at least 6-8 weeks for these small group or 11 interventions

For Example If a studentrsquos referral concern is basic word decoding most of these students would receive the following deep intervention Earobics

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Background Continued

As we grew as a district with our Rti process it became evident that some type of district-wide fidelity process was needed especially due to the number of LD amp OHI referrals that continued to be recommended by campus Rti teams that often resulted in the student not qualifying for LD andor OHI

Variations across campuses was quite evident as to what constituted a ldquogood referralrdquo

In the meantime our district adopted a hybrid problem-solving approach which included the continuation of a campus student support team for our Tier 3 process Additionally there were elements of protocol-prescribed interventions build into the Tier plan as well

Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process

We considered many avenues but wanted a process that could qualitatively conceptualize these elements

What did seem most feasible was a process in which a district-level team would look closely at each FIE referral made on the campus level prior to consent being obtained utilizing key indicators to engage conversation

Thus the advent of the MISD District Fidelity Review Team The next step was to establish a protocol for conducting the District

Fidelity Review team

Having a consistent and detailed measure of fidelity of implementation

supports the efficacy of an Rti model

--D Mellard amp E Johnson Rti A Practionerrsquos Guide to Implementing Response to Intervention 2008 Corwin Press

Development of the MISD DFR Process

We chose to utilize a standard review process that included a specific documentation form used for all students reviewed by the team

We looked at various modelshellipwe werenrsquot quite ready as a district to pursue more formal fidelity checks district wide but found at least one guiding document that had key ideas that would apply to our needs New Mexico Public Education Department Response to

Intervention A Systematic Process to Increase Learning Outcomes for All Students (featured in The Answer Book on Rti ldquoRti Fideltiy Review Checklistrdquo c 2007 LRP Publications)

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

Our next step was deciding upon the key elements that would need to be considered Evidence of scientifically-based interventions Fidelity of interventions Progress Monitoring Data Consideration of Exclusionary Factors Consideration of Determinant Factors Additional Recommendations or Actions such as

including two prong consideration

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

We developed a uniform worksheet that would be utilized for each studenthellip

LEPELL Yes No

Initial Referral

Yes No Suspected Disability

Review of Tier 3Also-see attached written summary of screening data and educational history provided by the campus

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Evidence-based Interventions The student has received evidence-based small-group instruction for at least 6-8 weeks andor appropriate PBS planNotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Fidelity of intervention The intervention(s) was (were) implemented with fidelity for this student (including core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies)Notes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Progress Monitoring Data Weekly curriculum-based measuresprogress monitoring measures were implemented for at least 6-8 weeks Data from CBMsPGMs are consistent with the area(s) of concern established by the campus RTINotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Data-Based Decision Making The studentrsquos individualized or small-group interventions were reviewed revised andor discontinued based on student performance and progress after 6-8 week intervalsNotes

District Fidelity Review Worksheet Example

Evidence of scientifically-based interventions

In our district we have a recommended protocol for Tier 3 for addressing academic concerns

We do ask that the student be afforded at least 6-8 weeks for these small group or 11 interventions

For Example If a studentrsquos referral concern is basic word decoding most of these students would receive the following deep intervention Earobics

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process

We considered many avenues but wanted a process that could qualitatively conceptualize these elements

What did seem most feasible was a process in which a district-level team would look closely at each FIE referral made on the campus level prior to consent being obtained utilizing key indicators to engage conversation

Thus the advent of the MISD District Fidelity Review Team The next step was to establish a protocol for conducting the District

Fidelity Review team

Having a consistent and detailed measure of fidelity of implementation

supports the efficacy of an Rti model

--D Mellard amp E Johnson Rti A Practionerrsquos Guide to Implementing Response to Intervention 2008 Corwin Press

Development of the MISD DFR Process

We chose to utilize a standard review process that included a specific documentation form used for all students reviewed by the team

We looked at various modelshellipwe werenrsquot quite ready as a district to pursue more formal fidelity checks district wide but found at least one guiding document that had key ideas that would apply to our needs New Mexico Public Education Department Response to

Intervention A Systematic Process to Increase Learning Outcomes for All Students (featured in The Answer Book on Rti ldquoRti Fideltiy Review Checklistrdquo c 2007 LRP Publications)

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

Our next step was deciding upon the key elements that would need to be considered Evidence of scientifically-based interventions Fidelity of interventions Progress Monitoring Data Consideration of Exclusionary Factors Consideration of Determinant Factors Additional Recommendations or Actions such as

including two prong consideration

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

We developed a uniform worksheet that would be utilized for each studenthellip

LEPELL Yes No

Initial Referral

Yes No Suspected Disability

Review of Tier 3Also-see attached written summary of screening data and educational history provided by the campus

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Evidence-based Interventions The student has received evidence-based small-group instruction for at least 6-8 weeks andor appropriate PBS planNotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Fidelity of intervention The intervention(s) was (were) implemented with fidelity for this student (including core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies)Notes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Progress Monitoring Data Weekly curriculum-based measuresprogress monitoring measures were implemented for at least 6-8 weeks Data from CBMsPGMs are consistent with the area(s) of concern established by the campus RTINotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Data-Based Decision Making The studentrsquos individualized or small-group interventions were reviewed revised andor discontinued based on student performance and progress after 6-8 week intervalsNotes

District Fidelity Review Worksheet Example

Evidence of scientifically-based interventions

In our district we have a recommended protocol for Tier 3 for addressing academic concerns

We do ask that the student be afforded at least 6-8 weeks for these small group or 11 interventions

For Example If a studentrsquos referral concern is basic word decoding most of these students would receive the following deep intervention Earobics

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Development of the MISD DFR Process

We chose to utilize a standard review process that included a specific documentation form used for all students reviewed by the team

We looked at various modelshellipwe werenrsquot quite ready as a district to pursue more formal fidelity checks district wide but found at least one guiding document that had key ideas that would apply to our needs New Mexico Public Education Department Response to

Intervention A Systematic Process to Increase Learning Outcomes for All Students (featured in The Answer Book on Rti ldquoRti Fideltiy Review Checklistrdquo c 2007 LRP Publications)

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

Our next step was deciding upon the key elements that would need to be considered Evidence of scientifically-based interventions Fidelity of interventions Progress Monitoring Data Consideration of Exclusionary Factors Consideration of Determinant Factors Additional Recommendations or Actions such as

including two prong consideration

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

We developed a uniform worksheet that would be utilized for each studenthellip

LEPELL Yes No

Initial Referral

Yes No Suspected Disability

Review of Tier 3Also-see attached written summary of screening data and educational history provided by the campus

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Evidence-based Interventions The student has received evidence-based small-group instruction for at least 6-8 weeks andor appropriate PBS planNotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Fidelity of intervention The intervention(s) was (were) implemented with fidelity for this student (including core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies)Notes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Progress Monitoring Data Weekly curriculum-based measuresprogress monitoring measures were implemented for at least 6-8 weeks Data from CBMsPGMs are consistent with the area(s) of concern established by the campus RTINotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Data-Based Decision Making The studentrsquos individualized or small-group interventions were reviewed revised andor discontinued based on student performance and progress after 6-8 week intervalsNotes

District Fidelity Review Worksheet Example

Evidence of scientifically-based interventions

In our district we have a recommended protocol for Tier 3 for addressing academic concerns

We do ask that the student be afforded at least 6-8 weeks for these small group or 11 interventions

For Example If a studentrsquos referral concern is basic word decoding most of these students would receive the following deep intervention Earobics

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

Our next step was deciding upon the key elements that would need to be considered Evidence of scientifically-based interventions Fidelity of interventions Progress Monitoring Data Consideration of Exclusionary Factors Consideration of Determinant Factors Additional Recommendations or Actions such as

including two prong consideration

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

We developed a uniform worksheet that would be utilized for each studenthellip

LEPELL Yes No

Initial Referral

Yes No Suspected Disability

Review of Tier 3Also-see attached written summary of screening data and educational history provided by the campus

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Evidence-based Interventions The student has received evidence-based small-group instruction for at least 6-8 weeks andor appropriate PBS planNotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Fidelity of intervention The intervention(s) was (were) implemented with fidelity for this student (including core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies)Notes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Progress Monitoring Data Weekly curriculum-based measuresprogress monitoring measures were implemented for at least 6-8 weeks Data from CBMsPGMs are consistent with the area(s) of concern established by the campus RTINotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Data-Based Decision Making The studentrsquos individualized or small-group interventions were reviewed revised andor discontinued based on student performance and progress after 6-8 week intervalsNotes

District Fidelity Review Worksheet Example

Evidence of scientifically-based interventions

In our district we have a recommended protocol for Tier 3 for addressing academic concerns

We do ask that the student be afforded at least 6-8 weeks for these small group or 11 interventions

For Example If a studentrsquos referral concern is basic word decoding most of these students would receive the following deep intervention Earobics

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued

We developed a uniform worksheet that would be utilized for each studenthellip

LEPELL Yes No

Initial Referral

Yes No Suspected Disability

Review of Tier 3Also-see attached written summary of screening data and educational history provided by the campus

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Evidence-based Interventions The student has received evidence-based small-group instruction for at least 6-8 weeks andor appropriate PBS planNotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Fidelity of intervention The intervention(s) was (were) implemented with fidelity for this student (including core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies)Notes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Progress Monitoring Data Weekly curriculum-based measuresprogress monitoring measures were implemented for at least 6-8 weeks Data from CBMsPGMs are consistent with the area(s) of concern established by the campus RTINotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Data-Based Decision Making The studentrsquos individualized or small-group interventions were reviewed revised andor discontinued based on student performance and progress after 6-8 week intervalsNotes

District Fidelity Review Worksheet Example

Evidence of scientifically-based interventions

In our district we have a recommended protocol for Tier 3 for addressing academic concerns

We do ask that the student be afforded at least 6-8 weeks for these small group or 11 interventions

For Example If a studentrsquos referral concern is basic word decoding most of these students would receive the following deep intervention Earobics

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

LEPELL Yes No

Initial Referral

Yes No Suspected Disability

Review of Tier 3Also-see attached written summary of screening data and educational history provided by the campus

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Evidence-based Interventions The student has received evidence-based small-group instruction for at least 6-8 weeks andor appropriate PBS planNotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Fidelity of intervention The intervention(s) was (were) implemented with fidelity for this student (including core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies)Notes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Progress Monitoring Data Weekly curriculum-based measuresprogress monitoring measures were implemented for at least 6-8 weeks Data from CBMsPGMs are consistent with the area(s) of concern established by the campus RTINotes

1048710 Yes 1048710 No

Data-Based Decision Making The studentrsquos individualized or small-group interventions were reviewed revised andor discontinued based on student performance and progress after 6-8 week intervalsNotes

District Fidelity Review Worksheet Example

Evidence of scientifically-based interventions

In our district we have a recommended protocol for Tier 3 for addressing academic concerns

We do ask that the student be afforded at least 6-8 weeks for these small group or 11 interventions

For Example If a studentrsquos referral concern is basic word decoding most of these students would receive the following deep intervention Earobics

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Evidence of scientifically-based interventions

In our district we have a recommended protocol for Tier 3 for addressing academic concerns

We do ask that the student be afforded at least 6-8 weeks for these small group or 11 interventions

For Example If a studentrsquos referral concern is basic word decoding most of these students would receive the following deep intervention Earobics

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Fidelity of interventions

The delivery of our district and state curriculum in the manner in which it is established to be delivered

The DFR committee is charged with determining if the interventions were implemented with fidelity for this student including consideration of the core curriculum extensions supplemental curriculum and strategies

This has helped us to really look at the connection between Tier 1 Core Curriculummdashwhat every student is afforded versus increased supports for Tier 2 and Tier 3

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Progress Monitoring Data

Our district primarily utilizes AIMSweb for progress monitoring ELAR areas of concern

We chose to use TEKing Toward TAKS for Math progress monitoring

Our behavioral progress monitoring is specific to the studentrsquos referral concerns

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Data-based Decision Making

Every student in the Tier process has a written plan that is maintained and adjusted as needed for the students

Each campus has an Rti team that periodically reviews these students especially those on Tier 3

Our district expectation is that progress monitoring data should be utilized to adjust programming as needed

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Consideration of Exclusionary Factors

bullDoes the student have a visual hearing or motor disabilitybullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with mental retardationbullDoes the student meet criteria for a student with Emotional DisturbancebullDoes the student have cultural factors of interestbullDoes the student have environmental or economic disadvantage issues of interestbullIs the student considered Limited English ProficiencybullHas the student received adequate educational opportunity (including consideration of school attendance records)

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

bullDid the student make any progress with use of interventions bullDid the student receive interventions with appropriate provider over a period of time

Consideration of Determinant Factors

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

District Rti Fidelity Review Committeersquos Recommendations Proceed with campus RTI recommendation for

Referral for FIE for LDOHI or other Tried to list very specific referral concern

Return to the campus RTI for the proposed actions

At the Conclusion of Reviewing Each Studenthelliphellip

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Ensuring that we had well-balanced representation on the district team

Initially we started off with a small team that included five Rti specialist the district Rti coordinator and representatives from the evaluation team

Mid-year we added representation from campus leadership instructional specialist central office curriculum leadership and BilingualESL leadership to the teams

Challenge 1--Constitution of the District Fidelity Review Committee

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth As additional key members were added to the

committee we realized that we needed three elementary teams to accommodate the needs of our students and one secondary team

Teams each included a campus administrator as well as central office leadership including CampI and BilingualESL

The District Rti Coordinator was charged with scheduling students and keeping up with the weekly agenda

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Discussed

One of the concerns brought forth from our campuses about the new process was feeling that perhaps our committee was just looking at paper and not considering the whole child

We never intended to be a closed committee so this was an easy fixmdashwe asked that campuses send at least one representative that is familiar with the student being discussed as well as a campus administrator if possible

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Challenge 4mdashTime Management

There was always lots to talk about but never enough time

A few of our leaders in the group put together a Word template that campuses could use to summarize key information for the student

Information included the following referral concerns educational history interventions attempted and progress monitoring data

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Challenge 5 Training

Additionally the DFR teams are charged with determining if the student being reviewed is a student who is suspected of a disability and demonstrates the need for specially designed instruction

The example of J Walshrsquos Four Quadrant Analysis has been critical to building capacity in our group to better review each student especially the differentiation of Quadrants three and four

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)

Quadrant 4 These students need specially designed instruction due to a disability that adversely affects the studentrsquos educational performance

Versus

Quadrant 3 These students need specially designed instruction for reasons other than a physical or mental impairmentmdashLEP and WBFWR

--This has been one of the greatest areas of growth for our campuses as we utilize Tiers 2 amp 3 support more readily before considering a referral

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip Increased collaboration with special education

staff and general education staff Conversations that are vital to our growth for the

Rti process Considerations to the Rti process such as ldquoWhat

really is Tier 1hellipTier 2hellipTier 3 in MISD

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

24

Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats Over 140 students have been discussed this

school year by our DFR committees 115 + students were referred for an FIE The others were referred back to their

campus Rti teams for specific recommendations including possible general ed dyslexia testing

DNQ rate is pending

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step

25

Our Next Step

Continue the process for the next coming year on the district level

Work with campus Rti teams to build capacity to perform this type of review at a campus level thus enabling campuses ownership of the process

• Utilizing a District Fidelity Review Team to Ensure Appropriat
• Background
• Background Continued
• Why Pursue a District Fidelity Review Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued
• Development of the MISD DFR Process Continued (2)
• Slide 8
• Evidence of scientifically-based interventions
• Fidelity of interventions
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Data-based Decision Making
• Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
• Slide 14
• Challenges Encountered This Yearhellip
• Challenge 2mdashNeeded More Teams to Share the Wealth
• Challenge 3mdashAdequate Representation for the Student Being Disc
• Challenge 4mdashTime Management
• Challenge 5 Training
• 4 Quatrant Analysis (J Walsh)
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti Processhellip
• Added Value Gained to the District Rti ProcesshellipThe Stats
• Our Next Step