transcript
- Slide 1
- How To Do Classwide Intervention within RTI Amanda VanDerHeyden
Education Research and Consulting, Inc.
- Slide 2
- Objectives Today Overview of RTI, RTI decision making, and
expected outcomes Specific How-To for Classwide Math Intervention
Implementing intervention for sustenance and system change
- Slide 3
- Slide 4
- Slide 5
- Disparities in Achievement Substantially lower level of
performance in Reading at first and second grades for
African-American students relative to their Caucasian peers
(approximately 20 wc/min) Slower growth rate (approximately half)
at both grade levels Differences not observed in Math
- Slide 6
- In Low-Achieving Classrooms (more than 50% of class scored in
the frustrational range on probes) STEEPTeacher Referral
Sensitivity.75.55 Specificity.88.68 Positive Predictive Power.69.35
Negative Predictive Power.91.82 VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005
- Slide 7
- In Average to High-Achieving Classrooms (less than 20% of class
scored in frustrational range on probes) STEEPTeacher Referral
Sensitivity.670 Specificity1.0.67 Positive Predictive Power 1.00
Negative Predictive Power.97.95 VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005
- Slide 8
- % Accurate ID by Race MinorityCaucasian STEEP9086 Teacher
Referral 7861 Use of RTI with STEEP approximated base rate by race
and gender AA students showed a disproportionate RTI (.50
versus.07) VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005
- Slide 9
- Research Finding VanDerHeyden, Broussard, et al. (2004). Prior
to single instructional session, children receiving special ed
services were significantly lower performing on math probes.
Following single instructional session, no significant difference
was observed.
- Slide 10
- Mixed Mult/Div/Fractions Probe Classroom F
- Slide 11
- Sore Thumb Test
- Slide 12
- Response to Classwide Intervention Student A
- Slide 13
- Individual Math Intervention Cant Do Problem
- Slide 14
- Successful Math Intervention BaselineIntervention Novel,
grade-level probe
- Slide 15
- Why do Classwide Intervention Efficiency Accuracy Efficacy
- Slide 16
- STEEP Model Screening to Enhance Educational Progress
- Slide 17
- Tier 1: Screening Screening Math Screening 2 minutes. Scored
for Digits Correct Writing Screening 3 Minutes. Scored for Words
Written Correctly Reading Screening 1 Minute. Scored for Words Read
Correctly
- Slide 18
- Class-wide Screening
- Slide 19
- Feedback to Teachers
- Slide 20
- Tier 2: Class-wide Intervention
- Slide 21
- No Class-wide Problem Detected
- Slide 22
- Tier 2: Cant Do/Wont Do Assessment Cant Do/Wont Do
Individually-administered Materials Academic material that student
performed poorly during class assessment. Treasure chest: plastic
box filled with tangible items. 3-7 minutes per child
- Slide 23
- Cant Do/Wont Do Assessment
- Slide 24
- Decision Rule Following Cant Do/Wont Do Assessment
- Slide 25
- Tier 3: Individual Intervention
- Slide 26
- Response to Intervention Before Intervention During
Intervention Avg. for his Class Intervention in Reading #Correct
Intervention Sessions Each Dot is one Day of Intervention
- Slide 27
- Before Intervention During Intervention #Correct Avg. for his
Class Response to Intervention
- Slide 28
- Instructional range Frustrational range Vehicle for System
Change: System-wide Math Problem Each bar is a students
performance
- Slide 29
- Re-screening Indicates No Systemic Problem Fourth Grade
- Slide 30
- Rest of Grade at Standard ABCDEFClassroom
- Slide 31
- Spring 2003 Classroom F F
- Slide 32
- Teacher moved to lower grade in Fall 2003
- Slide 33
- Class-wide Intervention Teacher F Mult 0-12 0 20 40 60 80 100
120 10/24/200310/31/2003 11/7/2003 11/14/200311/18/2003 Weeks
Digits Correct Two Minutes
- Slide 34
- Increased Difficulty- Intervention Continues
- Slide 35
- Mixed Mult/Div/Fractions Probe Classroom F
- Slide 36
- Growth Obtained aimline actual growth
- Slide 37
- Effect on High-Stakes Scores VanDerHeyden, in prep
- Slide 38
- Effect on High-Stakes Scores VanDerHeyden, in prep
- Slide 39
- District-wide Implementation Data Vail Unified School District
www.vail.k12.az.us Three years, system-wide implementation of STEEP
grades 1-8
- Slide 40
- System Outcomes Referrals reduced greater than half % who
qualify from 50% stable baseline over three years to nearly 100%
SLD down from 6% of children in district in 2001-2002 (with
baseline upward trend) to 3.5% in 2003-2004 school year
Corresponding gains on high-stakes tests (VanDerHeyden & Burns,
2005) Intervention successful for about 95 to 98% of children
screened VanDerHeyden, Witt, & Gilbertson, 2007
- Slide 41
- Cost Reduction VanDerHeyden, Witt, & Gilbertson, 2007
- Slide 42
- Findings Number of Evaluations dramatically reduced 70% at
highest referral school Diverse settings, psychologists of diverse
backgrounds and no prior experience with CBM or functional academic
assessment Percentage qualify increased at 4 of 5 schools
Disproportionate representation of males positively affected Number
of children placed dramatically reduced VanDerHeyden, Witt, &
Gilbertson, 2007
- Slide 43
- Team Decision-Making Agreement RTI + and Evaluated RTI- and Did
Not Evaluate 2003-2004 (3 schools) 100%41% 2004-2005 (5 schools)
100%87% VanDerHeyden, Witt, & Gilbertson, 2007
- Slide 44
- Team Decision-Making VanDerHeyden, Witt, & Gilbertson,
2007
- Slide 45
- Fall to Spring Reading Growth VanDerHeyden & Witt,
2005
- Slide 46
- What Proportion of Ethnicity Represented Before and After
Intervention in Risk Category? VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005
- Slide 47
- Identification Accuracy High-achieving classrooms (50%)
Procedures paired with RTI criterion were more accurate than other
commonly used screening devices VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005
- Slide 48
- Weighing a cow doesnt make it fatter.
- Slide 49
- Break
- Slide 50
- Using Screening Data to Identify Class-wide and System-wide
Instructional Problems
- Slide 51
- Consider The Task Integrity of Administration Reliability of
Scoring Use software to organize the data
- Slide 52
- Mult 0-9 4 th Grade Fall Screening
- Slide 53
- Mult/Div/Fractions 4 th Grade Winter
- Slide 54
- Grade-wide Data
- Slide 55
- Slide 56
- Slide 57
- 3 rd Grade Mult 0-9 Spring
- Slide 58
- Guided Practice
- Slide 59
- Fourth Grade Reading Level: Math Skill 1: Math Skill 2:
- Slide 60
- Questions Is there a classwide problem? Is there a gradewide
problem? Whats the most efficient way to deliver intervention?
- Slide 61
- Slide 62
- Slide 63
- Slide 64
- Slide 65
- What Data do you Want for Principal?
- Slide 66
- Slide 67
- Slide 68
- Slide 69
- Questions Is there a classwide problem? Is there a gradewide
problem? Whats the most efficient way to deliver intervention?
- Slide 70
- Independent Practice
- Slide 71
- First Grade Reading What do you want to know? Is there a
class-wide problem? Is there a grade-wide or systemic problem?
Whats the most efficient way to deliver intervention? (whole class,
small group, individual) What is the next step for Class 1, 2, 3,
4?
- Slide 72
- Class 1
- Slide 73
- Class 2
- Slide 74
- Class 3
- Slide 75
- Class 4
- Slide 76
- Grade-wide Data
- Slide 77
- Slide 78
- Class 4
- Slide 79
- Screening tells you How is the core instruction working? What
problems might exist that could be addressed? Most
bang-for-the-buck activity Next most high-yield activity is
classwide intervention at Tier 2.
- Slide 80
- Screening Guidelines Efforts at Tier 1 pay off with fewer
children needing individual intervention 3 times per year, single
probe Use small team of trained coaches Prepare all needed
materials in a packet for each teacher Score and return within 1
week on graph Use data to generate aimlines, can be used to set
benchmarks
- Slide 81
- Digits Correct Two Minutes Weeks 121 Pass the AIMS
- Slide 82
- Academic SystemsBehavioral Systems 1-5% 5-10% 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 Any
Curriculum Area Students Dave Tilly, 2005
- Slide 83
- Class-wide Intervention Use pair-peered practice (classwide
peer tutoring, PALS) Model, Guided Practice, Independent timed
practice with delayed error correction, reward contingency
- Slide 84
- Unsupported means. Team recommends intervention. All materials
have to be created from scratch Teachers sent to organize class and
train No one may be an expert to help the teacher No or not enough
frequent objective data to collect or interpret
- Slide 85
- With teacher support Consider time, resources, materials Remove
skill barriers with classroom training for students classroom
coaching for teachers Remove implementation barriers after use new
steps follow-up supportive meetings to problem solve. frequent
acknowledgment of a teachers efforts
- Slide 86
- Time consuming Complex not yet fluent Cant Do Poor management
No child change Wont do No reinforcement for teacher behaviors No
teacher change prevents Address Common Reasons for Resistance Lack
of materials prevents Too much work avoidance prevents
- Slide 87
- Select a Few Good Interventions to Keep it Simple
ClasswideIndividual MathFlash card Practice Cover copy compare Cue
Cards Highlighted errors ReadingListening PreviewRepeated Readings
Error Correction Key Words
- Slide 88
- Prepare for Training Day Locate probes (e.g., worksheet
factory, intervention central, basic skill builders) Identify
Graphing Program (excel) Locate or develop scripts (gosbr.net;
interventioncentral.org) Develop quick access to materials for
teachers Determine integrity monitoring plan Identify common time
for intervention Set start date
- Slide 89
- Set a daily routine. Time, location of materials, process for
weekly assessment. Set a date and time for 30-min training Set a
date for a later 15-minute first practice time with teacher
- Slide 90
- Materials needed Computer and software to organize data Student
data imported. Clerical person to enter data on- site for tier 1
screen only. Color printer to print graphs + extra color cartridges
Probe materials, digital count-down timers Intervention protocols,
intervention materials (e.g., flashcard sets, reading materials)
Access to copier and some assistance with copying Reinforcers for
treasure chest (no more than $500 per school)
- Slide 91
- Usually the higher-level reader, reads (models) first. Rotating
high level readers helps maintain motivation
- Slide 92
- How-To Classwide Math
- Slide 93
- Slide 94
- Slide 95
- Intervention Plan- 15 Min per Day Protocol-based classwide peer
tutoring, randomized integrity checks by direct observation Model,
Guide Practice, Independent Timed Practice with delayed error
correction Group performance contingency Teachers encouraged to
Scan papers for high error rates Do 5-min re-teach for those with
high-error rates Provide applied practice using mastery-level
computational skill
- Slide 96
- Measurement Plan Weekly probe of Intervention skill Weekly
probe of Retention of previously mastered computational skills
Monthly probe using GOM approach to monitor progress toward
year-end computational goals To this you might add an application
measure
- Slide 97
- Sample Sequence
- Slide 98
- Intervention Plan Class Median reaches mastery range for skill,
next skill is introduced Following promising results at one site in
2002-2003, lead to implementation district- wide grades 1-8 for all
children by 2004- 2005.
- Slide 99
- Acquisition Fluency Generalization Instructional Hierarchy To
gain the steepest growth, introduction of new skills should happen
here Core Instruction- Not manipulated But fluency building should
happen here with an instructional level skill Intervention Focus
was here Finally, problem-solving/ application practice should
occur here with a mastery level skill Core Instruction- Not
Manipulated but could be
- Slide 100
- Class-wide Math Intervention
- Slide 101
- ..\..\Math Assessment 04_05\Skill Sequence 04-05.doc..\..\Math
Assessment 04_05\Skill Sequence 04-05.doc
- Slide 102
- ..\..\Math Assessment 04_05\Data\FINAL 04--05\Cottonwood
5-27.xls..\..\Math Assessment 04_05\Data\FINAL 04--05\Cottonwood
5-27.xls
- Slide 103
- Provided teacher/student a script that tells. what the student
has to do and when what the teacher should do to support student
how the student will know how he/she is doing Treatment
considerations for integrity issues All steps are clearly needed
Includes lots of student response opportunities Disrupts class as
little as possible Requires little teacher time ( < 15 min/day)
Considers resources to decrease teacher effort Used simple language
All the materials are available Rationale
- Slide 104
- Trainer 1.Observe the teacher using the steps on the
intervention script 2. Check off steps used. 3. Prompt the teacher
to do any missed step. 4. Problem Solve any noted blockers 5.
Continue until accurately implemented without prompts
- Slide 105
- Lack of practice with feedback Non-specific steps In adequate
classroom management Not enough child assistance for bx change Lack
of reinforcement For teacher behaviors Low implementation Low
frequencies interferes prevents Why verbal and modeling training
alone do not work: Inadequate materials prevents No instructions
when problems arise
- Slide 106
- Math Partners Progress Chart Count every digit that is not
circled. This is your score! Write your score on your math sheet.
Find todays date on this page and write your score on the line. Put
a Star on the graph to mark todays score.
- Slide 107
- Weekly Progress Monitoring Administer classwide math worksheet
Target skill once per week Criterion skills periodically to monitor
growth Use incentives to maximize performance Apply decision
rules
- Slide 108
- Progress Review Review folders to ensure that intervention was
used correctly for at least 4 days that week If this is not the
case, conduct another in- class training day. Graph weekly progress
monitoring assessment data
- Slide 109
- Decision making Review data to make decisions: DATA OUTCOME 1:
Class median is below mastery range and most students gaining
digits correct per week. ACTION: Consider implementing intervention
for an additional week and then review progress again.
- Slide 110
- Decision making DATA OUTCOME 2: Class median is below mastery
range and most students are not gaining digits correct per week:
ACTION: Check Integrity first and address with training if needed.
Consider implementing intervention for an additional week with
incentives or easier task and then review progress again.
- Slide 111
- Decision making DATA OUTCOME 3: If the class median is above
mastery range then consider: ACTION: Increasing task difficulty and
continuing classwide intervention. ACTION: For students performing
in the frustration range, consider Tier 3 assessment and
intervention.
- Slide 112
- Tell Rational Step by step protocol Show Model Do Train
students Implement with guided practice Implement independently
with support Training Package
- Slide 113
- > 80% of interventions are not used without support
- Slide 114
- Troubleshoot Intervention SupportYesNo Was the intervention
developed to ensure that it required minimal classroom time and
resources and fit within daily classroom routines? Are materials
readily available to the teacher? Was a step-by-step coach card
provided? Was the teacher shown how to implement the intervention
by a coach? Did the coach observe implementation of the
intervention to ensure that the teacher could use the intervention
correctly and had all needed materials? Was weekly follow-up
support provided to the teacher after initial training? Are
integrity data graphed to show used correctly? Is an administrator
involved?
- Slide 115
- Results
- Slide 116
- Tier 1 Screening Indicates Class- wide Problem
- Slide 117
- Tier 2: Class-wide Intervention Teacher F Mult 0-12 0 20 40 60
80 100 120 10/24/200310/31/2003 11/7/2003 11/14/200311/18/2003
Weeks Digits Correct Two Minutes
- Slide 118
- Increased Difficulty- Intervention Continues
- Slide 119
- Contextually-Relevant Comparisons and Use of Trend Data
- Slide 120
- 5 th Grade Math Intervention
- Slide 121
- Slide 122
- Instructional range Frustrational range Pre-post changes to
performance detected by CBM Each bar is a students performance
- Slide 123
- Fourth Grade
- Slide 124
- Effect on SAT-9 Performance
- Slide 125
- Effect on CBM Scores
- Slide 126
- Computation Gains Generalized to High Stakes Test Improvements
(Gains within Multiple Baseline shown as pre-post data)
- Slide 127
- Gains within Multiple Baseline (shown as pre-post data)
- Slide 128
- Additional Research Questions What level of performance
predicted strongest subsequent growth given intervention? What
level of performance predicted skill would be retained about 3
months after it was taught? Did mastery of foundation skills
shorten the number of trials required to master more complex
related skills?
- Slide 129
- What level of performance predicted strongest subsequent growth
given intervention? Across 4 weeks of intervention (4 datapoints)
OLS used to estimate slope Children achieving slopes equal to or
greater than the 66 th percentile were identified as strong
responders Starting fluency (prior to intervention) was identified
for the group of strong responders and range was estimated as
average starting fluency +/- 1 standard deviation Tested new
criterion on second set of scores Burns & VanDerHeyden,
2006
- Slide 130
- New Range Digits Correc t/Min Reliabilit y (tau) Validity (rho)
FrusInstMast 2 nd -3 rd 14-31.35.0822%70%8% 4 th -5 th
24-49.63.5022%67%11% 2 nd - 3 rd 1.772.011.55 4 th - 5 th
1.161.441.25
- Slide 131
- General Findings Growth rates and trials to criterion varied
dramatically across skills Retention probe was strongest predictor
of year- end SAT-9 performance Mastery level performance on early
skills predicted fewer trials to criterion on future related
complex skills Fluency scores higher than mastery predicted
retention of skill over time (about +20 dc/min) VanDerHeyden &
Burns, 2008; VanDerHeyden & Burns, in submission
- Slide 132
- Identification Accuracy CBA + RTI CriterionITBSWJ-R STEEP
Sensitivity.761.58 Specificity.89.99.77 Positive Predictive
Power.59.67.44 Negative Predictive Power.951.86 Teacher Referral
Sensitivity.46.33.42 Specificity.69.94.85 Positive Predictive
Power.19.17.45 Negative Predictive Power.89.97.83 VanDerHeyden, et
al., 2003
- Slide 133
- Percent Identified at each Tier Identified CBM (Classwide
Assessment) 55 (15%) CBM + Reward (Performance/skill Deficit
Assessment) 40 (11%) CBM + Reward + Instruction (STEEP +) 22 (6%)
Teacher Referral 32 (19%) CIBS-R 64 (18%) DRA 17 (9%) RTI Criterion
Assessment 17 (5%) WJ-R 12 ITBS deficit 3 (4%) VanDerHeyden, et
al., 2003
- Slide 134
- Academic SystemsBehavioral Systems 1-5% 5-10% 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 Any
Curriculum Area Students Dave Tilly, 2005
- Slide 135
- To work smart, we must ask What is the purpose of our
assessment? How do we know it serves our purpose? Is this the
cheapest way to do it?
- Slide 136
- Our Goal Collect the best information in the shortest possible
period of time
- Slide 137
- Tier 3 Assessment Data Instructional level performance Error
analysis (high errors, low errors, pattern) Effect of incentives,
practice, easier task Verify intervention effect Same
implementation support as Tier 2 Instructional-level materials;
Criterion-level materials
- Slide 138
- Tier 3 Implement for 5-15 consecutive sessions with 100%
integrity Link to referral decision Weekly graphs to teacher and
weekly generalization probes outside of classroom, supply new
materials Troubleshoot implementation weekly
- Slide 139
- Strategy in a Nutshell Identify the goal (DVs) Behavior to
increase (fluency, comprehension) Behavior to decrease (errors)
Match the strategy to the goal (Daly et al., 1996) Monitor the DVs
and the IVs (intervention variables)
- Slide 140
- Find instructional level (sampling back) Identify the root of
the problem (e.g., division is difficult because subtraction is not
fluent or multiplication is not fluent; poor decoding skills v.
dolce words; production v. accuracy in writing) This is the most
important part of the process
- Slide 141
- Accurate Letter Naming Fluent Letter Naming Association of
Letters with phonemes Accurate Letter Sound Production Fluent
Letter Sound Production Pronounce beginning word sounds Define the
Behaviors/skills
- Slide 142
- Other Sample Hierarchies Reading 5 th Grade, 2 nd Semester
Reading 5 th grade, 1 st semester Reading 4 th grade, 2 nd semester
Reading 4 th grade, 1 st semester Reading 3 rd grade, 2 nd semester
Math 2 nd Grade Subtraction 0-9 Addition 0-18 Addition 0-9
- Slide 143
- Identify Reinforcers and Logical Consequences Use a treasure
chest Use an activity survey or reinforcer checklist Use incidental
teaching strategy Use logical or natural consequences
- Slide 144
- Measure Baseline Performance and Set Goals
- Slide 145
- Acquisition Fluency Generalization This is the Instructional
Hierarchy To gain the steepest growth, introduction of new skills
should happen here But fluency building should happen here with an
instructional level skill Finally, problem-solving/ application
practice should occur here with a mastery level skill
- Slide 146
- Functional Assessment What is an effective intervention?
- Slide 147
- Functional Assessment
- Slide 148
- BLInterventionPerformance Feedback
- Slide 149
- Troubleshooting Intervention Effects at Tier 3
- Slide 150
- Teachers must weigh the following What outcomes does not
completing work produce? Escape from assignment, from classroom
setting Peer attention Adult attention (even if it is negative).
Some students are so motivated to obtain adult attention that it
does not matter if the attention is negative or positive. What
outcomes does completing work produce? Positive feedback from the
teacher Positive attention from peers, status Access to fun
activities or reinforcement Avoidance of punitive consequences
- Slide 151
- Antecedent Variables Task Difficulty, Sequencing of Skills Time
actively engaged in learning (AET) Opportunities to respond Other
lesson variables (pacing, exemplars) Behaviors interfering with
instruction (teacher and child)
- Slide 152
- Task Difficulty, Sequencing Sample back measuring fluency of
performance on basic skills The idea is to identify the weak point
in the chain Define the target skill for intervention and the
criterion skill (goal)
- Slide 153
- Academic Engaged Time Impacts opportunities to respond Robust
predictor of achievement Average 2 nd grader (Rosenshine) spent
less than 1 hour AET per day. Check transitions, classroom
management, time allocated for independent practice, active
monitoring/scanning
- Slide 154
- Other Lesson Variables Presentation of materials and Sequencing
of Lesson Organized Clear, redundant examples Exemplars sufficient
S+ and S- Checking for student understanding Pacing of lesson
- Slide 155
- Behaviors Interfering with Instruction/Intervention Teacher
behaviors Implementation accuracy and consistency Fuchs &
Fuchs, 1987; Gresham, 1991; Happe, 1982; Wickstrom, Jones, LaFleur,
& Witt, 1998 Teacher understanding/adequately trained Train to
fluency criterion (Chandler, Lubeck, & Fowler, 1992) Teacher
acceptability of intervention (prospective, ongoing, link to
changes) Adequate resources to conduct intervention
- Slide 156
- Behaviors Interfering with Instruction Child behaviors
Disruptive or inattentive behaviors Concurrent options available
(access to reinforcing outcomes by not completing intervention)
Consider cant do/wont do (although programming for motivation is
important anyway)
- Slide 157
- Consequences Reinforcing consequences (for correct and
incorrect performance) Escaping task Extra attention (staying in at
recess may be reinforcing) Feedback Frequency Immediacy Accuracy
Correct error immediately, have student repeat response correctly,
match response to instructional situation & learner (Heubusch
& Lloyd, 1998)
- Slide 158
- Tier 3 Intervention >5% of children screened (total
population) IF solid Tier 1 Possibly as low as 2% IF solid Tier 1
and Tier 2 About 1-2% failed RTI; 10% of most at-risk VanDerHeyden
et al., 2007
- Slide 159
- Tier 3 Findings Most interventions for reading Math is next
Math is at least two-dimensional--- computational and operational
fluency plus application or conceptual understanding Most
interventions are not implemented well and thats why they fail Tier
3 interventions are likely to occur on below grade level tasks AND
require acquisition-type instruction (discrimination training to
establish accurate responding)
- Slide 160
- Successful Math Intervention
- Slide 161
- Unsuccessful Math Intervention
- Slide 162
- Integrity Matters 59% Integ96% Integrity
- Slide 163
- Integrity Matters
- Slide 164
- Slide 165
- Integrity Untreated integrity problems become student learning
deficits, schoolwide learning problems, and false positive decision
errors Integ problems affect dose and quality of the treatment (an
intervention implemented with fidelity is a functionally different
intervention than one implemented inconsistently Integ positively
correlated with student learning gains, amount of intervention
covered Even veteran sites require monitoring and follow-up
- Slide 166
- Tips for Effective Implementation
- Slide 167
- Our Recipe for Intervention Success PREPARATION Identify and
Use standard protocols for intervention Develop all needed
materials Develop packets or put on a central web site Determine
graphing program
- Slide 168
- Our Recipe for Intervention Success TRAIN Explain Watch the
teacher do it with the actual child before you leave Call or meet
teacher after first day to problem solve
- Slide 169
- DATA COLLECTION AND SUPPORT Each week, graph intervention
performance and do a generalization check with the child. Graphed
feedback to teachers with generalization checks for individual
intervention once per week Response-dependent performance feedback
to sustain implementation accuracy Monthly CBM to track growth and
enhance existing Tier 1 Programs or advise new Tier 1 Data to
principal weekly. Summarize effects and integrity of procedures.
Our Recipe for Intervention Success
- Slide 170
- DATA DECISION -MAKING RTI successful if child performs
criterion-level probe (from screening) in the instructional range.
RTI unsuccessful if 15 consecutive intervention sessions and
criterion probe is not in the instructional range. Increase task
difficulty for intervention if child scores at mastery on task
during intervention sessions
- Slide 171
- Guidelines for Implementers Use single trial scores for
screening Following screening, grade-wide graphs to principal
Return data to teachers within 48 hours with personal
interpretation at grade-level team meeting Include principal in
critical meetings Involve teachers at all stages
- Slide 172
- Guidelines for Implementers Learn about curriculum and
instruction. Integrate RTI with ongoing school and system reform
efforts Thoughtfully merge to subtract duplicate activities and to
enhance more comprehensive supplemental and core instructional
support activities that may be in place Use RTI data to evaluate
the value of ALL instructional programs or resource allocation
decisions. Quantify bang for the buck using student performance
data.
- Slide 173
- Infrastructure for Implementation Grade-level planning periods
can be utilized Special education team at school can be utilized
School Psych must be on-site 1 day/week Developing master schedule
for Tier 1, 2, and 3 intervention times is useful Integrate efforts
with evaluation referral team efforts (consider major reduction in
meeting time and shift to intervention efforts!) Use existing
instructional periods to target student needs more effectively See
NASDSE blueprint for implementation Brown-Chidsey book coming from
Guilford
- Slide 174
- For More Information amandavande@gmail.com www.isteep.com Thank
you to the US Dept of Education for providing all film clips shown
in this presentation