Response to Intervention: Accelerating Achievement for ALL Students Illinois IEA Professional...

Response to Intervention: Accelerating Achievement for ALL StudentsIllinois IEA Professional Development Workshop

Dr. George M. Batsche

Professor and Co-Director

Institute for School Reform

Florida Statewide Problem-Solving/RtI Project

University of South Florida

National Resources to Support District and School Implementation

• www.nasdse.org– Building and District Implementation Blueprints– Current research (evidence-based practices) that supports use of RtI

• www.rtinetwork.org– Blueprints to support implementation– Monthly RtI Talks– Virtual visits to schools implementing RtI– Webinars– Progress Monitoring Tools to Assess Level of Implementation

• www.justreadflorida.org/readingwalkthrough/– Principal Walk Through Integrity Evaluations

• www.floridarti.usf.edu– Introductory Course

http://www.nasdse.org/

http://www.rtinetwork.org/

http://www.justreadflorida.org/

http://www.floridarti.usf.edu/

The Vision

• 95% of students at “proficient” level

• Students possess social and emotional behaviors that support “active” learning

• A “unified” system of educational services– One “ED”

• Student Support Services perceived as a necessary component for successful schooling

The Outcomes

• Maximize effect of core instruction for all students• Targeted instruction and interventions for at-risk

learners• Significant improvements in pro-social behaviors• Reduction in over-representation of diverse student

groups in low academic performance, special education, suspension/expulsion, and alternative education.

• Overall improvement in achievement rates• Maximize efficiency and return on investment• AYP

The Model

Response to Intervention

• RtI is the practice of (1) providing high-quality instruction/intervention matched to student needs and (2) using learning rate over time and level of performance to (3) make important educational decisions.

(Batsche, et al., 2005)

• Problem-solving is the process that is used to develop effective instruction/interventions.

Problem Solving Process

EvaluateResponse to

Intervention (RtI)

EvaluateResponse to

Intervention (RtI)

Problem AnalysisValidating ProblemIdent Variables that

Contribute to ProblemDevelop Plan



Define the ProblemDefining Problem/Directly Measuring Behavior


Implement PlanImplement As Intended

Progress MonitorModify as Necessary



Three-Tiered Model of School Supports & the Problem-solving Process

ACADEMIC SYSTEMS

Tier 3: Comprehensive & Intensive Students who need individualized interventions.

Tier 2: Strategic Interventions Students who need more support in addition to the core curriculum.

Tier 1: Core Curriculum All students, including students who require curricular enhancements for acceleration.

BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS

Tier 3: Intensive Interventions Students who need individualized intervention.

Tier 2: Targeted Group Interventions Students who need more support in addition to school-wide positive behavior program.

Tier 1: Universal Interventions All students in all settings.

Model of Schooling

• All district instruction and intervention services have a “place” in this model.

• If it does not fit in the model, should it be funded?

• All supplemental and intensive services must be integrated with core.

Problem-Solving/RtIResource Management

• Public Education Resource Deployment– Support staff cannot

resource more than 20% of the students

– Service vs Effectiveness--BIG ISSUE

1-5% 1-5%

5-10% 5-10%

80-90%80-90%

Students

Academic Behavior

RtI: Framing Issues and Key Concepts

• Academic Engaged Time (AET) is the best predictor of student achievement– 330 minutes in a day, 1650 in a week and 56,700 in a year– This is the “currency” of instruction/intervention– Its what we have to spend on students– How we use it determines student outcomes.

• MOST students who are behind will respond positively to additional CORE instruction. – Schools have more staff qualified to deliver core instruction

than specialized instruction.– Issue is how to schedule in such a way as to provide more

exposure to core.

RtI: Framing Issues and Key Concepts

RtI: RATE

• Rate is growth per week (month) necessary to close the GAP

• Rate becomes the statistic we need to define evidence-based intervention (EBI)

• EBI is any intervention that results in the desired RATE

RtI: 3 Priorities

1. Prevention: Identify students at-risk for literacy failure BEFORE they actually fail.– Kindergarten screening, intervention and progress

monitoring is key.– No excuse for not identifying ALL at-risk students

by November of the kindergarten year.– This strategy prevents the GAP.– Managing GAPs is more expensive and less likely

to be successful.

RtI: 3 Priorities

2. Early Intervention– Purpose here is the manage the GAP.– Students who are more that 2 years behind have a

10% chance, or less, or catching up.– Benchmark, progress monitoring data, district-wide

assessments are used to identify students that have a gap of 2 years or less.

– Students bumping up against the 2 year level receive the most intensive services.

– This more costly and requires more specialized instruction/personnel

RtI: 3 Priorities

3. Intensive Intervention– Reserved for those students who have a GAP of more

than 2 years and the rate of growth to close the GAP is unrealistic. Too much growth—too little time remaining.

– Problem-solving is used to develop instructional priorities.

– This is truly a case of “you cannot do something different the same way.”

– This is the most costly, staff intensive and least likely to result in goal attainment

How Does it Fit Together?Standard Treatment Protocol

Addl.Diagnostic

Assessment

InstructionResults

Monitoring

IndividualDiagnostic

IndividualizedIntensive

weekly

All Students at a grade level

ODRsMonthly

Bx Screening

Bench-Mark

Assessment

AnnualTesting

Behavior Academics

None ContinueWithCore

Instruction

GradesClassroom

AssessmentsYearly Assessments

StandardProtocol

SmallGroupDifferen-tiatedBy Skill

2 times/month

Step 1Step 2 Step 3 Step 4

Supplemental

1-5%

5-10%

80-90%

Core

Intensive

Critical Components

• Data are used to evaluate the effectiveness of core instruction– 80% of students receiving ONLY core instruction

are proficient

• Supplemental Instruction/Intervention uses a “standard protocol” of instruction based on student needs, informed by data– 70% of students receiving Supplemental AND Core

are proficient

Critical Components

• Intensive instruction developed for students who have not responded as desired to Core PLUS Supplemental Instruction

What Does the Research Say About RtI?

Effective Schools

Data on the Top 10 Schools Meeting the Effective School Criteria

School EI score

EI %ile

ECI score

ECI %ile

% free & reduced lunch

% minority

% ELL # of children in K-3

A 39 99 83 82 89 84 47 499

B 36 97 83 79 99 98 55 463

C 34 95 89 95 80 83 22 455

D 33 93 88 93 93 94 42 487

E 33 91 84 84 75 78 31 428

F 32 89 85 89 85 80 37 618

G 32 89 80 67 93 93 25 480

H 32 89 84 84 73 67 31 556

I 31 89 79 66 87 95 27 301

J 31 89 80 67 70 99 11 575

What is the impact of PSM/RtI on students from diverse backgrounds?

• VanDerHeyden, et al. report that students responded positively to the method and that African-American students responded more quickly than other ethnic groups.

• Marston reported a 50%decrease in EMH placements over a 6-year period of time.

• Marston reported a drop over a 3-year period in the percent of African-American students placed in special education from 67% to 55%, considering 45% of the student population was comprised of African-American Students.

• Batsche (2006) reported a significant decrease in the risk indices for ELL and African-American students

Risk Indices by Year & Race/Ethnicity

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

School Year

Per

cen

tag

e

Reading First - White

Reading First - Black

Reading First - Hispanic

Comparison - White

Comparison - Black

Comparison - Hispanic


Implementation

How Do We “Do” RtI?

• Organized by a District PLAN

• Driven by Professional Development

• Supported by Coaching and Technical Assistance

• Informed by DATA

Change Model

Consensus

Infrastructure

Implementation

Stages of Implementing Problem-Solving/RtI

• Consensus– Belief is shared– Vision is agreed upon– Implementation requirements understood

• Infrastructure Development– Problem-Solving Process– Data System– Policies/Procedures– Training– Tier I and II intervention systems

• E.g., K-3 Academic Support Plan– Technology support– Decision-making criteria established

• Implementation

Building Consensus

• Knowledge• Beliefs• Understanding the

“Need”- DATA• Skills and/or Support

Consensus:Essential Beliefs

• No child should be left behind• It is OK to provide differential service

across students• Academic Engaged Time must be

considered first• Student performance is influenced

most by the quality of the interventions we deliver and how well we deliver them- not preconceived notions about child characteristics

• Decisions are best made with data• Our expectations for student

performance should be dependent on a student’s response to intervention, not on the basis of a “score” that “predicts” what they are “capable” of doing.

Consensus Development:Data

• Are you happy with your data?

• Building/Grade Level Student Outcomes– Disaggregated– AYP

Knowledge and Skill Requirements

Personnel Critical to Successful Implementation

• District-Level Leaders

• Building Leaders

• Facilitator

• Teachers/Student Services

• Parents

• Students

Development of the Infrastructure

Key Points

• Unit of implementation is the building level.• Implementation process takes 4-6 years.• Implementation progress must be monitored • Must be guided by data indicating implementation

level and integrity• Must be supported by professional development

and technical assistance• Drive by a strategic plan• It is a journey, not a sprint

Implementation Model

• District-based leadership team (DBLT)

• School-based leadership team (SBLT)

• School-based coach– Process Technical Assistance– Interpretation and Use of Data

• Evaluation Data

The Infrastructure

Problem Solving Process

EvaluateResponse to

Intervention (RtI)

EvaluateResponse to

Intervention (RtI)











Steps in the Problem-Solving Process

1. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION• Identify replacement behavior• Data- current level of performance• Data- benchmark level(s)• Data- peer performance• Data- GAP analysis

2. PROBLEM ANALYSIS• Develop hypotheses( brainstorming)• Develop predictions/assessment

3. INTERVENTION DEVELOPMENT• Develop interventions in those areas for which data are available

and hypotheses verified• Proximal/Distal• Implementation support

4. Response to Intervention (RtI)• Frequently collected data• Type of Response- good, questionable, poor

Data For Each Tier - Where Do They Come From?

• Tier 1: Universal Screening, accountability assessments, grades, classroom assessments, referral patterns, discipline referrals

• Tier 2: Universal Screening - Group Level Diagnostics (maybe), systematic progress monitoring, large-scale assessment data and classroom assessment

• Tier 3: Universal Screenings, Individual Diagnostics, intensive and systematic progress monitoring, formative assessment, other informal assessments

“Academic” Behaviors

• Class work completed/accuracy

• Home work completed/accuracy

• Test scores/accuracy

• Student Level of Performance

• Goal or benchmark

• Peer level of performance

Example

• Data taken during a single grading period (6 weeks)

• Progress Monitor Homework completed and accuracy– Goal: Completed 75%, Accuracy 75%– Student: Completed 40%, Accuracy 50%– Peers: Completed 65%, Accuracy 78%– Time Frame: 6 weeks– Assignments/Week: 20

Example

• Completion:• 75-40=30 % improvement in 6 weeks• 30%/6 weeks= Improvement rate of 5%/week• 5% of 20 assignments=1 per week• Rate of Improvement for an effective intervention is 1

ADDITIONAL ASSIGNMENT PER WEEK

Decision Rules:What Constitutes “Good” RtI?

Decision Rules

• Response to Intervention Rules

• Linking RtI to Intervention Decisions

Decision Rules: What is a “Good” Response to Intervention?

• Positive Response

– Gap is closing

– Can extrapolate point at which target student(s) will “come in range” of target--even if this is long range

– Level of “risk” lowers over time

• Questionable Response

– Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still widening

– Gap stops widening but closure does not occur

• Poor Response

– Gap continues to widen with no change in rate.

Performance

Time

Positive Response to Intervention

Expected Trajectory

Observed Trajectory

Decision Rules: What is a “Questionable” Response to Intervention?


– Gap is closing





– Level of “risk” remains the same over time

• Poor Response


Performance

Time

Questionable Response to Intervention

Expected Trajectory

Observed Trajectory

Decision Rules: What is a “Poor” Response to Intervention?


– Gap is closing





• Poor Response


– Level of “risk” worsens over time

Performance

Time

Poor Response to Intervention

Expected Trajectory

Observed Trajectory

Performance

Time


Expected Trajectory

Observed Trajectory

Positive

Questionable

Poor

Decision Rules: Linking RtI to Intervention Decisions

• Positive

• Continue intervention with current goal

• Continue intervention with goal increased

• Fade intervention to determine if student(s) have acquired functional independence.


• Questionable

– Was intervention implemented as intended?

• If no - employ strategies to increase implementation integrity

• If yes -

– Increase intensity of current intervention for a short period of time and assess impact. If rate improves, continue. If rate does not improve, return to problem solving.


• Poor

– Was intervention implemented as intended?

• If no - employ strategies in increase implementation integrity

• If yes -

– Is intervention aligned with the verified hypothesis? (Intervention Design)

– Are there other hypotheses to consider? (Problem Analysis)

– Was the problem identified correctly? (Problem Identification)

BUILDING THE FOUNDATION

10 - 15%

Tier I Problem-Solving:Data and Skills

Needed

80 - 90%

Tier I - Assessment Discipline Data (ODR)

Benchmark AssessmentSchool Climate Surveys

Universal ScreeningFCAT

Universal ScreeningDistrict-Wide Assessments

Tier I - Core Interventions School-wide Discipline

Positive Behavior SupportsWhole-class Interventions

Core Instruction

Tier 1 Data Example

Referral Analysis

• 42% Noncompliance• 30% Off-Task/Inattention• 12% Physical/Verbal

Aggression• 6% Relational

Aggression• 10% Bullying

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1stQtr

2ndQtr

3rdQtr

4thQtr

Noncompliance

Off Task

Aggression

RelAggressionBullying

Building-Level Behavior Data

• % Building %Referred

Male 50%80%

White 72%54%

Hispanic 12% 20%

African American 15%24%

Other 1% 2%

Low SES 25% 50%

Behavior Referral Analysis

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Building

Referred

What does core instruction look like for reading?

K-5– 90 minute reading block

• Comprehensive reading program is the central tool for instruction.• Explicit, systematic, and differentiated instruction is provided.• In-class grouping strategies are in use, including small group instruction as

appropriate to meet student needs. • Active student engagement occurs in a variety of reading-based activities,

which connect to the essential components of reading and academic goals. • Effective classroom management and high levels of time on task

are evident.6-12

– Content area courses in which the reading content standards are addressed for all students including:

• Middle School Developmental Reading• English/Language Arts• Other core areas such as science, social studies, and math

What strategies exist to differentiate instruction for K-5 students in Tier 1?

• Differentiate in small, flexible reading groups – Use data to form groups based on skills to be taught

(comprehension, phonics, etc.)– Ensure that groups are flexible – Determine a schedule to rotate children through

groups/centers– Ensure that students with the most intensive needs

meet in the teacher-led center everyday• Targeted and deliberate independent reading

practice that utilizes relevant practice, extension, and production opportunities

What strategies exist to differentiate instruction for 6-12 students in Tier 1?

• CAR-PD• Differentiate in small groups

– Use data to from groups based on skills to be taught

– Groups need to be flexible – Determine a schedule to rotate students through

groups

• Support from the reading coach• Take responsibility for student learning

What data can be collected to evaluate the impact of core instruction?

• Progress monitoring assessments three times a year (Benchmarking)

• Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM)• Core Reading Program Unit Tests / Curriculum-

based assessments• Outcome measures (SAT-10 and State Tests)

to make decisions about student placement for the following year

What strategies are available to evaluate the fidelity of core instruction?

• Principal Reading Walk Through– “If it gets inspected, it gets respected”

• Effective instruction checklist

• Elementary core reading program checklists

Effective Instruction (Foorman et al., 2003; Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Arrasmith, 2003; & Rosenshine, 1986)

Characteristic Guiding Questions Well Met Somewhat Met

Not Met

Goals and Objectives Are the purpose and outcomes of instruction clearly evident in the lesson plans? Does the student understand the purpose for learning the skills and strategies taught?

Explicit Are directions clear, straightforward, unequivocal, without vagueness, need for implication, or ambiguity?

Systematic Are skills introduced in a specific and logical order, easier to more complex? Do the lesson activities support the sequence of instruction? Is there frequent and cumulative review?

Scaffolding Is there explicit use of prompts, cues, examples and encouragements to support the student? Are skills broken down into manageable steps when necessary?

Corrective Feedback Does the teacher provide students with corrective instruction offered during instruction and practice as necessary?

Modeling Are the skills and strategies included in instruction clearly demonstrated for the student?

Guided Practice Do students have sufficient opportunities to practice new skills and strategies with teacher present to provide support?

Independent Application Do students have sufficient opportunities to practice new skills independently?

Pacing Is the teacher familiar enough with the lesson to present it in an engaging manner? Does the pace allow for frequent student response? Does the pace maximize instructional time, leaving no down-time?

Instructional Routine Are the instructional formats consistent from lesson to lesson?

80 - 90%

10 - 15%

1 - 5%

Tier II Problem-SolvingData and Skills

Needed

Tier II - Targeted InterventionsTargeted Group Interventions

Increased IntensityNarrow FocusLinked to Tier I

80 - 90%

10-15%

Tier II - AssessmentBehavioral Observations

Intervention Data Group Diagnostic

Universal ScreeningProgress Monitoring

Tier I - Core InterventionsTier I Assessment

Data Infrastructure: Using Existing Data to Predict Intervention Needs for Tier 2

• Previous referral history predicts future referral history• Benchmark and Progress Monitoring Data• Common Assessments in Middle and High School• Middle and High School

– Student data history prior to entering

Data-Driven Infrastructure:Establishing a Building Baseline

• Code referrals (reasons) for past 2-3 years– Identifies problems teachers feel they do not have the

skills/support to handle– Referral pattern reflects skill pattern of the staff, the

resources currently in place and the “history” of what constitutes a referral in that building

– Identifies likely referral types for next 2 years– Identifies focus of Professional Development Activities AND

potential Tier II and III interventions– Present data to staff. Reinforces “Need” concept

Tier Functions/Integration

• How the Tiers work

• Time aggregation

• Tier integration

How the Tiers Work

• Goal: Student is successful with Tier 1 level of support-academic or behavioral

• Greater the tier, greater support and “severity”• Increase level of support (Tier level) until you identify an intervention that

results in a positive response to intervention• Continue until student strengthens response significantly• Systematically reduce support (Lower Tier Level)• Determine the relationship between sustained growth and sustained

support.

Integrating the Tiers

• 5th grade student reading at the 2nd grade level– Tier 3

• Direct Instruction, Targeted, Narrow Focus (e.g., phonemic awareness, phonics, some fluency)

– Tier 2• Fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, pre-teach for Tier 1

– Tier 1• Focus on comprehension, participation, scripted decoding

• Use core materials for content• Progress monitor both instructional level and grade placement level skills

What do we know about the characteristics of effective interventions?

• They always increase the intensity of instruction - they accelerate learning

They always provide many more opportunities for re-teaching, review, and practice

They are focused carefully on the most essential learning needs of the students.

Characteristics of Tier 2 Interventions

• Available in general education settings• Opportunity to increase exposure (academic engaged time) to

curriculum• Opportunity to narrow focus of the curriculum• Sufficient time for interventions to have an effect (10-30 weeks)• Often are “standardized” supplemental curriculum protocols

Interventions: Tier 2

• First resource is TIME (AET)– HOW much more time is needed?

• Second resource is curriculum– WHAT does the student need?

• Third resource is personnel– WHO or WHERE will it be provided?

Tier 2: Getting TIME

• “Free” time--does not require additional personnel– Staggering instruction

– Differentiating instruction

– Cross grade instruction

– Skill-based instruction

• Standard Protocol Grouping• Reduced range of “standard” curriculum• After-School• Home-Based

Tier 2: Curriculum

• Standard protocol approach• Focus on essential skills• Most likely, more EXPOSURE and more FOCUS of core

instruction• Linked directly to core instruction materials and benchmarks• Criterion for effectiveness is 70% of students receiving Tier 2

will reach benchmarks

Tier 2: Personnel

• EVERYONE in the building is a potential resource• Re-conceptualize who does what• Personnel deployed AFTER needs are identified• WHERE matters less and less• REMEMBER, student performance matters more than labels, locations and

staff needs.• A school cannot deliver intensive services to more than 7% of the population

3 Fs + 1 S + Data + PD = Effective & Powerful Instruction

• Frequency and duration of meeting in small groups – every day, etc.

• Focus of instruction (the What) – work in vocabulary, phonics, comprehension, etc.

• Format of lesson (the How) – determining the lesson structure and the level of scaffolding, modeling, explicitness, etc.

• Size of instructional group – 3, 6, or 8 students, etc.

• Use data to help determine the 3 Fs and 1 S (the Why)

• Provide professional development in the use of data and in the 3 Fs and 1 S

What does supplemental instruction/intervention look like for reading?

• Logistics of supplemental instruction/ intervention– Specific time and place included in schedule– Who will provide it? (classroom teacher or outside

support – Reading specialist, ESE, SLP, etc.) – Materials/how will the provider access them?– Common planning time established between the

classroom teacher and intervention teacher, if applicable

– Establish guidelines for when to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction and guidelines to determine what is a “good” response

Intervention Support

• Intervention plans should be developed based on student need and skills of staff

• All intervention plans should have intervention support • Principals should ensure that intervention plans have

intervention support • Teachers should not be expected to implement plans

for which there is no support

Critical Components of Intervention Support

• Support for Intervention Integrity

• Documentation of Intervention Implementation

• Intervention and Eligibility decisions and outcomes cannot be supported in an RtI model without these two critical components


• Pre-meeting– Review data– Review steps to intervention– Determine logistics

• First 2 weeks– 2-3 meetings/week– Review data– Review steps to intervention– Revise, if necessary


• Second Two Weeks– Meet twice each week

• Following weeks– Meet at least weekly– Review data– Review steps– Discuss Revisions

• Approaching benchmark– Review data– Schedule for intervention fading– Review data

Tier 3 Decisions

• GAP?

• Rate??

• Independent Functioning?– Fade Intervention to Supplemental Level– Evaluate Rate

Tier 3

• Individual and Very Small Group

• Individual Diagnostic Procedures

• Intensive Interventions

• Goal is to determine interventions that close the GAP

• Pre-requisite for consideration for any special education program

Ways that instruction must be made more powerful for students “at-risk” for reading difficulties.

More instructional time

More powerful instruction involves:

Smaller instructional groups

Clearer and more detailed explanations

More systematic instructional sequences

More extensive opportunities for guided practice

More opportunities for error correction and feedback

More precisely targeted at right level

resources

skill

What are the logistics of Tier 3 instruction?

– Specific place and time set aside on the schedule (daily)– Who will provide it? (classroom teacher or outside support –

Reading specialist, ESE, SLP, etc.)– Materials/how will the provider access them?– Common planning time established between the two

providers, if applicable– Establishing guidelines for when to evaluate the

effectiveness of instruction and guidelines to determine what is a “good” response

Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM)

K-2 – all of the same TDI tasks– ORF in grades 1 and 23-12 – ORF at grades 3-5– MAZE at grades K-12– Informal toolkit with:

• Instructional Level reading comprehension passages & passage-specific Question & Response templates

• Multiple Lexiled passages for oral reading fluency, accuracy, and comprehension

• Phonics Inventory• Sight Word Inventory• Instructional Implications of Word Analysis Task

How do we ensure that Tier 3 instruction is integrated with/includes core instructional content when appropriate and transfers to student success in core?

• Instructors need to communicate, if applicable

• Both instructors must have access to the core materials, if applicable

• Understanding the core content in order to provide access to the information but at an appropriate reading level

Data-Based Determination of Expectations: Elsie

• Benchmark Level: 100 WCPM• Current Level: 47 WCPM• Difference to June Benchmark (Gap): 53 WCPM• Time to Benchmark: 41 Weeks• Rate of Growth Required:

– 53/41= 1.29 WCPM for Elsie• Peer Group Rate = about 1.1 WCPM growth (at benchmark) 1.2 WCMP

(for “some risk” benchmark)• REALISTIC? Not unless you increase AET

Elsie Tier 2 (Results 2)End of Grade 2 and Grade 3

62

4752

56 5855 56

62

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

School Weeks

Word

s C

orr

ect P

er

Tier 2: Supplemental -

Trendline = 1.07 words/week

Note: Third Grade Msmt.Materials used at end of Second grade and throughThird grade

Aimline = 1.29 words per week

Questionable RtI

Tier 2- Supplemental Instruction - Revision

• The intervention appeared to be working. What the teachers thought was needed was increased time in supplemental instruction.

• They worked together and found a way to give Elsie 30 minutes of supplemental instruction, on phonics and fluency, 5x per week.

Data-Based Determination of Expectations: Elsie

• Benchmark Level: 100 WCPM• Current Level: 56 WCPM• Difference to June Benchmark (Gap): 44 WCPM• Time to Benchmark: 27 Weeks• Rate of Growth Required:

– 44/27= 1.62 WCPM for Elsie• Peer Group Rate = 1.1 WCPM growth (at benchmark) 1.2 WCMP (for

“some risk” benchmark)• REALISTIC? Not unless you increase AET


62

4752

56 5855 56

62

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

School Weeks

Word

s C

orr

ect P

er




Aimline = 1.62 words per week


62

4752

56 5855 56

6265 66

7377 75 76

89

8288

92 90

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

School Weeks

Word

s C

orr

ect P

er




Trendline = 1.51words/week

Supplemental Revised

Aimline = 1.62words/week

Good RtI

Aimline= 2 percent/week

Trendline = 3 percent/week

Bart

20 1822 21

24 2225

3026

2830

2831

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

School Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rrec

t P

er M

in

Tier 2: Strategic -PALS

Tier 3: Intensive - 1:1 instruction, 5x/week, Problem-solving Model to Target Key Decoding Strategies, Comprehension Strategies

Aimline= 1.50 words/week


Behavioral

Case

Examples

Response to Intervention: Accelerating Achievement for ALL Students Illinois IEA Professional...

Documents

Transcript of Response to Intervention: Accelerating Achievement for ALL Students Illinois IEA Professional...