RtI Because It Is Right for Kids

OCMBOCESSyracuse, New YorkNovember 15, 2010

John E. McCook, Ed.Djmccook125@aol.com

865-693-5884Copyright© 2010 John E. McCook

WHY RTI?

• Einstein’s definition of insanity: “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”

• USDOE has written the obituary for the discrepancy model– Based upon President’s Commission on Excellence– Based upon IDEIA 2004– Based upon LDA research findings

• New York K-4 Reading July 1, 2012

WHY RTI?• Discrepancy has developed into a “wait to fail” model• Discrepancy model has not proven to be effective• Over identification• Congress in 1975 placed a 2% limit on prevalence if USDOE

did not determine criteria by Jan 1, 1978– USDOE sets criteria Dec 29, 1977– Almost 2% 1977 and almost 6% 2001– Widespread variance of prevalence

• KY 2.96%, GA 3.29% …..CT 4.93%......MA 7.88%, NM 8.41%, RI 9.46%

• Disproportionality

Why RTI?

• Use information that makes sense to school personnel– Logical– Research based– Discussion is based on school staff experience– Utilize teacher’s daily data as part of the problem solving

method– Is this the best we can do?– "The question is not, Is it possible to educate all children

well? But rather, Do we want to do it badly enough?" D. Meier

Why RTI?

• “The United States is the only country in the industrialized world where children are less likely to graduate from high school than their parents were.” New York Times, page A29, Nicholas D. Kristof, November 13, 2008. (study by Education Trust, advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.) emphasis added

National Literacy Crisis

Below Basic Basic Proficient/Advanced

42%

29% 29%

8th Grade Students (2005)

(Source: National Center for Education Statistics)

Reading Math

32%29%

39%

Teaching Reading is Urgent: Brutal Fact

PercentileRank

Minutes Per Day Words Read Per Year

Books Text Books Text

98 65.0 67.3 4,358,000 4,733,000

~ A student in the 20th percentile 90 21.2 33.4 1,823,000 2,357,000

reads books 0.7 minutes a day. 80 14.2 24.6 1,146,000 1,697,000

~ This adds up to 21,000 words 70 9.6 16.9 622,000 1,168,000

read per year. 60 6.5 13.1 432,000 722,000

~ A student in the 80th percentile 50 4.6 9.2 282,000 601,000

reads books 14.2 minutes a day. 40 3.2 6.2 200,000 421,000

30 1.8 4.3 106,000 251,000

~ This adds up to 1,146,000 words

20 0.7 2.4 21,000 134,000

read per year.

10 0.1 1.0 8,000 51,000

2 0 0 0 8,000Torgeson, J.K. 2005

Grade level corresponding to age 1 2 3 4

Read

ing

grad

e le

vel

4

3

2

1

5

2.5

5.2

Early Intervention Changes Reading Outcomes

At Risk on Early Screening

Low Risk on Early Screening

3.2

Control

With research-based core but without extra instructional intervention

4.9

Intervention

With substantial instructional intervention

Torgesen, J.K. ( 2001). The theory and practice of intervention: Comparing outcomes from prevention and remediation studies.  In A.J. Fawcett and R.I. Nicolson (Eds.). Dyslexia: Theory and Good Practice. (pp. 185-201). London: David Fulton Publishers. Slide coursety of W. Alan Coulter http://www.monitoringcenter.lsuhsc.edu

44

Academic Systems Behavioral Systems

1-5% 1-5%

5-10% 5-10%

80-90% 80-90%

Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•High Intensity•Of longer duration

Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•Intense, durable procedures

Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response

Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response

Universal Interventions•All students•Preventive, proactive

Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive

The BasicsAny

CurriculumArea

Stu

den

ts

Sagai, Kutash et al

Tier 1 Non-negotiables

Tier 1 STANDARDS-BASED CLASSROOM LEARNING:• All students participate in general education learning that

includes: – Universal screenings to target groups in need of specific instructional

support. – Implementation of the Standards through a standards based

classroom structure. – Differentiation of instruction including fluid, flexible grouping, multiple

means of learning, and demonstration of learning.– Progress monitoring of learning through multiple formative

assessments.

So What Does New York Say?

Tier I in New York

• Interventionist: general education teacher• Setting: general education classroom• Grouping: variable and flexible grouping formats• Curriculum: scientific, research-based instruction aligned to state learning

standards in core academic areas• Duration: year-long• Length of Instructional Sessions: involves a minimum of 90 minutes of

uninterrupted, ELA instruction per day• Assessment: all students are screened at least 3 times per year (Fall, Winter,

Spring)• Progress Monitoring: students initially identified as at-risk on screening

measures are progress monitored on a weekly basis for 5-6 weeks

Tier 2 Non-negotiables

NEEDS-BASED LEARNING:• In addition to Tier 1, targeted students participate in

learning that is different by including:– Standard intervention protocol process for identifying and

providing research based interventions based on need and resources.

– On-going progress monitoring to measure student response to intervention and guide decision-making.

So What Does New York Say? Tier II

• Interventionist: trained, skilled and knowledgeable school personnel• Setting: variable, can occur in and/or outside of general education

classroom• Grouping: small, homogeneous grouping (1:3 – 1:5)• Curriculum: scientifically research-based instruction designed to

remediate skill deficits of targeted students• Duration: varies – based on rate of progress and performance of students;

10 to 30 weeks minimum• Length of Intervention Sessions: 20 – 30 minutes, 3 to 4 times per week• Assessment: may include formal and informal measures to inform

instruction• Progress Monitoring: twice monthly* to examine rate and level of

performance

Tier 3 Non-negotiables

DRIVEN LEARNING:• Targeted students participate in learning that is

different by including:– Intensive, formalized problem solving to identify individual

student needs.– Targeted research based interventions tailored to

individual needs.– Frequent progress monitoring and analysis of student

response to intervention(s).

New York Tier III• Interventionist: highly trained, skilled and knowledgeable school

personnel• Setting: most often takes place outside of the general education

classroom• Grouping: small, homogeneous grouping (1:1 – 1:2)• Curriculum: customized, intensive, systematic and research-based

instruction that targets academic areas of greatest need• Duration: varies- a minimum of 10-30 weeks• Length of Intervention Sessions: 30 – 60* minutes, five times per

week• Assessment: may include formal and informal measures to inform

instruction• Progress Monitoring: minimum once per week

15

From K-3 We Learn to Read

The Rest of Our Lives We Read To Learn!!!

What Taboos Do We Face

• The curricula can not be responsible• The settings can not be responsible• The adults can not be responsible

What does this leave us?• The child must have a disability

The Five Phases of Implementation

• Awareness• Commitment• Capacity• Implementation• Evaluation

18

19

Non Negotiable Components of RTI1. Universal screening

2. Multiple tiers of intervention

3. Progress monitoring

4. Problem-solving or standard protocol approach –the SAT Team

5. Integrated data collection/assessment system

6. Scientific, research-based interventions

7. Fidelity

8. Professional Development

Do I Really Have To?

• Federal Language1) Data that demonstrates that prior to, or as a part of,

the referral process, the child was provided “appropriate instruction in regular classroom settings,” delivered by qualified personnel; and

2) Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at “reasonable intervals” which were provided to the child’s parents.

34 C.F.R. 300.309

20

Do I Really Have To?

• Section 300.307(a)(2)-(3) requires that a state’s criteria for identification of SLD:– Must permit the use of a process based upon a

child’s response to scientific, research-based intervention; and

– May permit the use of other alternative research based procedures…. FAQ OSEP Question E-1:

21

So What Does New York Say?

• Effective July 1, 2012, all school districts in NYS must have an RtI program in place as part of its evaluation process to determine if a student in grades K-4 is a student with a learning disability in the area of reading. (NYSED, 2009)

New York

• Authorizes the use of RtI in the State's criteria to determine learning disabilities (LD) and requires, effective July 1, 2012, that all school districts have an RtI program in place as part of the process to determine if a student in grades K-4 is a student with a learning disability in the area of reading. “Effective on or after July 1, 2012, a school district shall not use the severe discrepancy criteria to determine that a student in kindergarten through grade four has a learning disability in the area of reading.”

• [8 NYCRR section 200.4(j)]

23

24

• Requires each school district to establish a plan and policies for implementing school-wide approaches and prereferral interventions in order to remediate a student’s performance prior to referral for special education, which may include the RtI process as part of a district’s school-wide approach. The school district must select and define the specific structure and components of its RtI program, including, but not limited to the:– criteria for determining the levels of intervention to be provided to students,– types of interventions,– amount and nature of student performance data to be collected, and– manner and frequency for progress monitoring.

• [8 NYCRR section 100.2(ii)]• Requires each school district implementing a RtI program to take

appropriate steps to ensure that staff have the knowledge and skills necessary to implement a RtI program and that such program is implemented consistent with the specific structure and components of the model.

• [8 NYCRR section 100.2(ii)]

Interventions are NOT• Preferential seating• Shortened assignments• Parent contacts• Classroom observations• Suspension• Doing MORE of the same / general classroom

assignments• Retention• Peer-tutoring

26

Example of Benchmark Data

Positive Response to Intervention

28

LD Students and RTI/Intervention Students R-CBM Growth

0.3

0.530.61 0.58 0.570.62

0.78 0.780.84 0.81

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1 2 3 4 5

Grade

Rat

e o

f In

crea

se

LD Students

RTI/InterventionStudents

Elementary Students Rate of Growth