RtI: Response to Intervention and the Problem Solving Model

Presented byAlison BoutcherDirector Mid-State Special Education 2007-08

Federal legislation: NCLB & IDEIA, Reading First

Problems with Traditional Service Delivery Model

Paradigm shift We want to continually reassess our

practices to be sure we are providing the best education for ALL students

Reason for Change

IDEA 2004

Eligibility Determinations

A child shall not be determined to be a child with a disability if determinant factor is: Lack of scientifically-based

instructional practices and programs that contain the essential components of reading instruction.

Lack of instruction in math Limited English Proficiency

IDEA 2004 Specific Learning Disabilities

The LEA shall not be required to take into consideration whether the child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning.

New IL Regulations

Each district shall, no later than the beginning of the 2010-11 school year, implement the use of a process that determines how the child responds to scientific, research-based interventions as part of the evaluation procedure described in 34 CFR 300.304.

New IL Regulations

In addition to using an identification process of the type required by subsection (b) of this Section, a district may use a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement for determining whether a child has a specific learning disability.

Plan for RtI

No later than January 1, 2009, each district shall develop a plan for the transition to the use of a process that determines how the child responds to scientific, research-based interventions as part of the evaluation procedure described in 34 CFR 300.304. Each district’s plan shall identify the resources the district will devote to this purpose and include an outline of the types of State-level assistance the district expects to need, with particular reference to the professional development necessary for its affected staff members to implement this process.

What is ‘Response to Intervention (RtI)’?

(Batsche, Elliott, Graden, Grimes, Kovaleski, Prasse, Reschly, Schrag, Tilley, 2005)

A 3-tiered process for service delivery that increases the intensity of services when a student fails to respond to an intervention

Identifying and providing high quality instruction and research-based interventions matched to students’ needs

Measuring rate of improvement (ROI) over time to make important educational decisions

Educators use ongoing student performance data to determine if an intervention is working. If it is not, it is time to do something different.

Response to Intervention is Not:

An instructional program. It is a framework to make decisions about instructional needs based on student data

Intended to focus only on students who are below expected levels of proficiency

Just an eligibility system – a way of finding students eligible and/or reducing the numbers of students placed into special education.

Advantages of Using Response to Intervention

RtI will help you to: Know immediately, “Is what we are

doing working?” Know which students need more Know what each student needs Provide structures to deliver what

students need Raise student achievement

Special Education

General Education

Sea of Ineligibility

Without Response to Intervention

With a 3-Tiered Model:Bridging the Gap

Special Education

General Education

Interventions

Intensity of Problem

Am

ount

of

Res

ourc

es N

eede

d to

Sol

ve P

robl

em

4 Critical Core Principles

Universal Screening Intervention Progress Monitoring Intervention Efficacy and Fidelity

Universal Screening

3 times each year – establish benchmarks

Tied to state academic standards and aligned to curriculum

Designed to measure basic academic skills

Typically administered school-wide to groups or individuals

Brief, reliable, valid

What Universal Screening Provides

Benchmark data norms for classrooms, grade levels, schools, districts

Information on the effectiveness of the core curriculum for most students

Information on the effectiveness of the core curriculum for subgroups

Data on which students are lagging well behind their peers

Interventions

Must be research-based Should involve active engagement Should modify the mode of task

presentation Should modify direct instruction

time, pacing, guided and independent practice

Should include more cues and prompts

Progress Monitoring

Brief, frequent assessments Evaluate student response to the

intervention Informs instruction

Intervention Efficacy and Fidelity

Teacher self-report/implementation logs

Ratings scales/checklist of steps Direct observation Permanent products created by

teacher/student

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

School-Wide Systems for Student Success

PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS

Identify the Concern and Define the Problem

Develop and Implement Intervention(s)

Monitor and Evaluate

Intervention(s)

Problem Analysis

PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS

Identify the Concern and Define the Problem

Develop and Implement Intervention(s)

Monitor and Evaluate Intervention(s) Problem Analysis

Often Some Steps are Skipped in the Process

“we want to help children as quickly as possible”

Identify the Concern

A mismatch between the student’s performance and the learning environment expectations

Example: The expectation is for students to complete seat work. The identified student’s work is incomplete.

Operationally Define the Behavior

• Objective

• Observable

• Measurable

•addressing Frequency, Duration and Intensity

Operationally Defining Behavior

(Target behavior) ________________ means that the student (action verbs) ______________________ . Examples of the behavior include:

1) _____________________________

2) _____________________________

3) _____________________________

Non-examples of the behavior include:

1) _____________________________

2) _____________________________

3) _____________________________

Analyze the Problem

The Use of a Scientific Method of Hypothesis-driven Questioning and Answer Seeking

• Why is this problem situation occurring?

• What factors (student characteristics, classroom/school environment, teacher/learner interaction, curriculum, peer relations, home and/or community issues) are contributing to the mismatch that exists between actual and desired levels of performance for each problem?

Develop and Implement Interventions

What are interventions?

Planned strategies designed to change (improve) the behavior of a specific learner

Includes the documenting and analyzing of data

Monitor Interventions: Progress Monitoring

Systematic procedure for the frequent and repeated collection and analysis of student performance data

It may be used to monitor any academic or non-academic behavior

It allows for the examination of student performance across time to evaluate intervention effectiveness

EXAMPLE: “MARCO”

Marco is in fifth grade. He was retained in kindergarten. Often he tells the teacher he doesn’t care about school. Marco has been earning D’s and F’s in all subjects.

In 1st through 4th grades Marco earned B’s, C’s and D’s. He usually did better in Math and Science. Reading and Language Arts were always the most difficult.

Marco has two older brothers and a younger sister in third grade. The brothers have a history of poor school attendance and poor school performance, however his sister typically earns B’s and C’s.

“MARCO”Assistance Using a

Problem Solving Process

Identify the Concern/Define the Problem

Analyze the Problem

Develop and Implement an Intervention

Monitor and Evaluate the Intervention

“MARCO”

Identify the Concern

Marco is not performing as expected in class. He is expected to earn C’s or above in all subjects at the 5th grade level.

Marco is earning D’s and F’s.

“MARCO”

Defining the Problem:

Not performing in class as expected means

a) Marco is completing less than 100% of his paper and pencil classroom assignments, quizzes and tests

b) He is scoring at less than 70% accuracy

“MARCO”-Narrow the Focus (Examine the Data) -

Examples of Target Behavior:

1. He has completed 8 of the last 16 in-class assignments

2. Of the last 12 in-class assignments he has completed 3/4 of the work leaving 1/4 not completed

3. On the past 3 tests and 6 quizzes he has earned an average of 65% accuracy - on the tests he averaged leaving seven items blank and on the quizzes he left an average of four items blank

Non-examples include:

- lack of homework completion

- performance in small group work

- in-class assignments in which there is not sufficient time to complete work

“MARCO”

Analyze the Problem

Factor #1 Student Characteristics

- language, cognitive, health,

self-perception, behavior/motivation

The records reflect average-to-above grades through 4th grade and group test scores ranging from the 25th to 65th percentile. The teacher and students fully understand Marco when speaks and he appears to completely understand others. Health records reflect no concerns. There is a question about how he feels about himself and his motivation. - The team agrees to gather more information by interviewing Marco.

“MARCO”

Analyze the Problem

Factor #2 Classroom/School Environment

- physical arrangements, instructional setting, presence and/or absence of resources, professional expertise

There are 23 students in the classroom with a classroom aide helping with three “lower functioning” students. She also helps others in the class depending on the situation. The teacher has ten years of experience and has successfully worked with other students in the past with a background similar to Marco’s. - No concerns.

“MARCO”

Analyze the Problem

Factor #3 Teaching/Learning Interaction

- teacher expectations, presentation style, instructional routine

The school psychologist has observed in the classroom numerous times. She reports that Marco consistently follows along and is attentive. The teacher notes that her classroom expectations are consistent with district specified grade level learning objectives. She mentions that all the other students are “keeping pace”. - This is not an identified area of concern.

“MARCO”

Analyze the Problem

Factor #4 Curriculum

- subjects, types of tasks, curricular expectations

The teacher notes Marco performed better in the first quarter, his poorer performance started at the beginning of the second quarter. The curriculum is no longer review, it has gotten more challenging. She believes it now may be too hard for Marco. This leads the team to a hypothesis. - If the curriculum is modified Marco will complete all his in-class work with 70% or higher accuracy.

“MARCO”

Analyze the Problem

Factor #5 Peer Relations

The classroom teacher reports that she has observed Marco interacting age-appropriately with many other students. The playground supervisor notes Marco plays well with other boys at recess. - Not an area of concern.

“MARCO”

Analyze the Problem

Factor #6 Home and/or Community Issues

There are questions about support and assistance and home. There are further concerns about possible negative influence by older brothers. The team determines these are secondary issues and will not address them at this time.

“MARCO”

Develop and Implement an Intervention

What to do next:

1. The school social worker will speak with Marco during the next week. She will interview him trying to better understand his feelings about himself and his performance at school. She will determine what kind of correlation exists between his thoughts and feelings related to this and his school performance.

2. The special education teacher and school psychologist will meet with the classroom teacher during the next week to modify the math and language arts curriculum (the teacher prioritized these two are

INTERVENTION:

After math and language arts are modified, the teacher will instruct Marco using these modifications.

“MARCO”

Monitor and Evaluate the Intervention

Monitor In-class paper and pencil tasks

Quizzes

Tests

Amount completed

% Correct

Evaluate

The team agreed to review the data in six weeks

NEXT STEPS

After reviewing the data from the interventions the team will determine:

a) It’s working - continue

b) It’s sort of working - refine it and continue

c) It’s not working - analyze why, consider other hypotheses and develop a different intervention

d) It’s not working - there are no other reasonable hypotheses and/or resources to assist, so consider other programs/services

What To Do With Egbert??

1st Grade, falling behind in reading Slow progress compared to peers Likely to miss benchmarks related to

passing 3rd Grade reading test Distractible, inattentive, disruptive Sound Familiar

0

20

40

60

80

100Class

Goal

Egbert

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Graph Current Status

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egbert=11

0

20

40

60

80

100 Class

Goal

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Determine Goal: Class=1.5 wd growth per week; Egbert Goal: 2 wd growth per week

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egbert=11

Class Growth

Egbert goal line

0

20

40

60

80

100Class

Goal

Egbert

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Monitor Egbert’s Progress Relative to Goal

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egbert=11

Class Growth

Egbert goal line

0

20

40

60

80

100Class

Goal

Egbert

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Formative Evaluation: Change Intervention

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egbert=11

Class Growth

Egbert goal line

ChangeIntervention

0

20

40

60

80

100Class

Goal

Egbert

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Continue Intervention and Monitor Progress

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egbert=11

Class Growth

Egbert goal line

ChangeIntervention

0

20

40

60

80

100ClassGoalEgbertGoal 2

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Raise Goal to 2.5 WCM Growth

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egbert=11

Class Growth

Egbert goal line

ChangeIntervention

Change Goal

0

20

40

60

80

100ClassGoalEgbertGoal 2

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Continue Intervention and Monitor Progress

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egbert=11

Class Growth

Egbert goal line

ChangeIntervention

Change Goal

Discontinue Tier II

Decisions Re: Egbert

Fade Tier II academic interventionReduce number of weekly sessionsMonitor progress to ensure continued

progress Evaluate behavioral intervention (not shown

here)Depending on results, consider

enhancing, fading, or discontinuing Do NOT consider more intensive

interventions

Case II: Egberta, Academic Intervention

Egberta (Egbert’s twin sister)Similar performance in readingNo behavioral issues, described as quiet,

cooperative child who tries hard and does not disrupt the class

Would not have been referred by teacher, but discovered through universal screening

0

20

40

60

80

100Class

Goal

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Egberta: Determine Goal: Class=1.5 wd growth per week; Egberta Goal: 2 wd growth per week

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egberta=11

Class Growth

Egberta goal line

0

20

40

60

80

100ClassGoalEgberta

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Monitor Egberta’s Progress Relative to Goal

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egberta=11

Class Growth

Egberta goal line

0

20

40

60

80

100ClassGoalEgberta

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Change Egberta’s Intervention

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class=24

Egberta=11

Class Growth

Egberta goal line

ChangeIntervention

0

20

40

60

80

100ClassGoalEgberta

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Implement Revised Intervention and Continue to Monitor Progress

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class Growth

Egberta goal line

ChangeIntervention

0

20

40

60

80

100ClassGoalEgberta

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Implement Second Intervention Revision

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class Growth

Egberta goal line

ChangeIntervention

0

20

40

60

80

100ClassGoalEgberta

Weeks

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Per

Min

ute

Gap Not Closing: Consider Eligibility and More Intensive Interventions

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 18 20

Class Growth

ChangeIntervention

ClassWCM=54

EgbertaWCM=32

It isn't where you came from; it's where you're going that counts.

Ella Fitzgerald