Effective Grade Level Teams

Minnesota RtI Center Conference March 26, 2009

Kerry BollmanSt Croix River Education District

…The Groups That Make This Happen!

Making Good Teams Tick

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

One Team Out Of Many…

BuildingCouncil

Safe and Welcoming

Sp.Ed. Services

GradeLevel

Teams

ProblemSolvingTeam

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Grade 4

Grade 4

Grade 4

ELLTitle 1

Sp.Ed.

Reading

ParaAdmin

Student Data

Hello From Our Grade Four Team!!!

Grade Level or Core Teams

• Membership– All Homeroom teachers, Reading teachers,

Title 1 teachers, Sped teachers, ESL teachers, Gifted teachers, Specials teachers, & Instructional coaches who serve the grade level

• Inclusive group• Students belong to the whole team

APRIL 2008Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 18 19

20 21 22 23 24 25 26

27 28 29 30Grade 3 - 7:45

Grade 4 - 7:45

Grade 5 - 7:45

Grade K - 7:45

Grade 1 - 7:45

Grade 2 - 7:45

March 2008 May 2008

Formally Scheduled Regular Meetings

Grade Level or Core Teams

• Meetings– Meet monthly for data review & planning (Typically an extra

meeting is needed in Sept)– 30-40 minutes works (25 minutes is tight!)– Standard agenda of predictable tasks– Plan for data display– Follows problem solving framework generally– Facilitator and note-taker roles needed

Grade Level Team Tier 1 MissionCollaborate to provide general ed instruction that meets the

instructional needs for most children

1. Problem IdentificationIs the core program sufficient?

2. Problem AnalysisIf the core program is not

sufficient, why isn’t it?

3. Plan DevelopmentHow will the needs identified in

the core be addressed?

4. Plan ImplementationHow will the effectiveness and efficiency of

the core be monitored over time?

5. Plan EvaluationHave improvement to the

core been effective?

September Agenda: Tier 1 Tasks

• Review Fall benchmark data, Fall MAP data, previous Spring MCA II data as available

• Identify the percentage of students who are falling in each tier based on the assessment data, and record this information (chutes & ladders)

• Establish an end of year team goal to work toward for the percentage of students you would like to see in each tier based on assessment data

• If the percentage of students in tier 1 is below 80%, discuss grade level wide opportunities for making the core program more robust for this cohort (how to best use core instructional time for all students)

• Discuss what you are doing to challenge your highest skilled students

Student ID Number

MCA-II GRADE 03 READING TEST

2008 Scale Score

MAP Reading Fall 08-09 2009

RIT SCORE

Oral Reading Fluency Fall

Benchmark 2009 RAW SCORE

369 212 221360 201 181367 208 176

214 174376 220 169376 212 155

196 155385 210 151372 204 147372 215 139367 203 137356 206 135385 219 135367 204 134358 205 133380 208 132346 205 131358 202 131372 207 129351 190 129350 188 127385 216 126372 207 125380 211 125372 210 121358 198 120372 207 119372 205 115369 213 115362 204 115367 204 111362 197 110355 209 109391 207 107348 196 105362 207 103365 200 98341 176 98362 198 96345 184 87365 207 84355 185 81345 194 80351 199 79346 193 64362 186 64338 183 61309 176 60348 194 59325 180 51319 170 38328 176 31301 166 31322 164 18

196343

% Benchmark 72% 71% 71%% Strategic 15% 16% 22%% Intensive 13% 13% 5%

MCA-II GRADE 03 READING TEST

2008 Scale Score

MAP Reading Fall 08-09 2009

RIT SCORE

Oral Reading Fluency Fall

Benchmark 2009 RAW SCORE

Fall Grade 4 Data

Student ID Number

MCA-II GRADE 03 READING TEST

2008 Scale Score

MAP Reading Fall 08-09 2009

RIT SCORE

Oral Reading Fluency Fall

Benchmark 2009 RAW SCORE

Oral Reading Fluency Winter

Benchmark 2009 RAW SCORE

360 201 181 251385 216 126 228

214 174 214369 212 221 204367 208 176 204376 220 169 195356 206 135 190385 210 151 179372 207 129 179376 212 155 174

196 170372 215 139 165346 205 131 165358 202 131 164

196 155 155351 190 129 155372 207 125 153385 219 135 151372 207 119 151367 203 137 147372 205 115 145380 211 125 144348 196 105 142372 210 121 141380 208 132 138350 188 127 138358 198 120 138367 204 111 137367 204 134 136369 213 115 136362 207 103 136362 204 115 134362 197 110 134372 204 147 130365 200 98 124343 123355 209 109 122

122358 205 133 121391 207 107 118362 198 96 115341 176 98 111355 185 81 108365 207 84 101351 199 79 100345 184 87 99346 193 64 92345 194 80 90

87348 194 59 81338 183 61 80362 186 64 75309 176 60 75325 180 51 68319 170 38 67328 176 31 50301 166 31 39322 164 18 23

% Benchmark 72% 71% 71% 72%% Strategic 15% 16% 22% 21%% Intensive 13% 13% 5% 9%

Benchmark to Benchmark 97%Benchmark to Strategic 3%Benchmark to Intensive 0%

Strategic to Benchmark 0%Strategic to Strategic 83%Strategic to Intensive 17%

Intensive to Benchmark 0%Intensive to Strategic 0%Intensive to Intensive 100%

% Benchmark 72% 71% 71% 72%% Strategic 15% 16% 22% 21%% Intensive 13% 13% 5% 9%

Benchmark to Benchmark 97%Benchmark to Strategic 3%Benchmark to Intensive 0%

Strategic to Benchmark 0%Strategic to Strategic 83%Strategic to Intensive 17%

Intensive to Benchmark 0%Intensive to Strategic 0%Intensive to Intensive 100%

MCA-II GRADE 03 READING TEST

2008 Scale Score

MAP Reading Fall 08-09 2009

RIT SCORE

Oral Reading Fluency Fall

Benchmark 2009 RAW SCORE

Oral Reading Fluency Winter

Benchmark 2009 RAW SCORE

Winter Grade 4 Data

Grade Level Team Tier 2 Mission

1. Problem IdentificationFor which students is the core program not sufficient and why?

2. Problem AnalysisWhat specific supplemental and intensive instruction is needed?

3. Plan DevelopmentHow will supplemental and

intensive instruction be delivered?

4. Plan ImplementationHow will effectiveness of supplemental and

intensive instruction be monitored?

5. Plan EvaluationWhich students need to move to a

different level of instruction?

Collaborate to provide interventions in support of students within general education that meet the instructional needs for an

additional group of children

September Agenda: Tier 2 Tasks

• Identify the initial list of students who should be monitored more frequently than 3x per year using fluency measures (typically every student scoring below target on fall measures

• Plan 1-3 standard intervention options that would address common concerns at this grade level, or refine previously designed plans– Record these plans as standard treatment protocols– Discuss the basis for selecting students for these

interventions– Select students for participation in specific interventions– Discuss logistics of intervention delivery (time, space,

people)– Discuss plans with building administration

Discussion Items

• Flexible Grouping– Use of within curriculum data, local

common assessments

• Time and Materials Used• Use of Reading or Other Non-

Classroom teachers– To strengthen core instruction?– To provide supplemental support?

123456789

101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R SKinder 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th .6 Reading 1.0 Reading 1.0 Reading .5 Math 1.0 ESOL 0.8 GATE 0.7 ESOL DHH Teacher Sped Teacher ELL Para Gen Ed Para

9:25 9:25

9:30 9:30

9:35 9:35

9:40 9:40

9:45 9:45

9:50 9:50

9:55 9:55

10:00 10:00

10:05 10:05

10:10 10:10

10:15 10:15

10:20 10:20

10:25 10:25 Third Grade10:30 10:30

10:35 10:35

10:40 10:40

10:45 10:45

10:50 10:50

10:55 10:55

11:00 11:00

11:05 11:05 Second Grade11:10 11:10 ESOL11:15 11:15

11:20 11:20

11:25 11:25

11:30 11:30

11:35 11:35

11:40 11:40

11:45 11:45 Fourth Grade

11:50 11:50

11:55 11:55

12:00 12:00

12:05 12:05

12:10 12:10

12:15 12:15

12:20 12:20 Third Grade12:25 12:25

12:30 12:30

12:35 12:35

12:40 12:40

12:45 12:45 ESOL Grade 2

12:50 12:50

12:55 12:55

1:00 1:00

1:05 1:05

1:10 1:10

1:15 1:15

1:20 1:20

1:25 1:25

1:30 1:30

1:35 1:35

1:40 1:40 Fourth Grade ESOL Grade K1:45 1:45

1:50 1:50

1:55 1:55

2:00 2:00

2:05 2:05

2:10 2:10

2:15 2:15

2:20 2:20

2:25 2:25

2:30 2:30 Kindergarten2:35 2:35

2:40 2:40

2:45 2:45

2:50 2:50

2:55 2:55

3:00 3:00

3:05 3:05

3:10 3:10

3:15 3:15

3:20 3:20

3:25 3:25

3:30 3:30

Third Grade Third Grade

Reading Grade 3

ESOL Grade 3Reading Grade 3

Third Grade Third Grade Third GradeThird Grade

Fifth Grade

First Grade

Kindergarten Reading 2:10 -

3:10

First Grade Math 12:25 -

1:55Second Grade

Reading 12:35 - 2:05

Lunch & Recess

Lunch & Recess

First Grade

Third Grade Reading

11:45 - 1:15

Third Grade Math 9:40 -

10:55

Fifth Grade Math 1:15 -

2:45

First Grade

Fourth Grade Math 9:30 -

11:30

Second GradeSecond Grade

Lunch & Recess

Fourth Grade Reading

12:55 - 2:25

Kindergarten Reading 9:55 -

10:55Kindergarten

Fifth Grade Reading

11:05 - 12:35Fifth Grade

First Grade Reading 9:30 -

11:30

Lunch & Recess

Second Grade Math 10:05 - 11:20

Lunch & Recess

Ongoing Tier 2 Tasks• Review team goal• Confirm that all students below target have

progress monitor graphs using fluency measures• Review graphs for all students

– Record decisions about program changes on Aimsweb graphs

– Decide if there are students who should be referred to the building level Problem Solving Team

• Discuss what you are doing to challenge your highest skilled students

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

•Student began year just below target•Team decided to monitor frequently, but not to intervene •Student continues to progress toward goal

•Student began year farther below target•Team decided to monitor frequently, but not to intervene •Began intervention as data points fell below aim line

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

•Student began year farther below target•Team decided to monitor frequently, then to add intervention •Definitely time to revise intervention

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Reflection

• If grade level teams believe in shared ownership of students, and meet frequently to collaborate on the design and delivery of core and supplemental instruction, using data to match student needs and services… what happens to a traditional “referral driven” model?

Grade Level Team Meetings Checklist for Fidelity of Data Review

Item Yes Partial No • Meeting comprised of staff who teach li teracy skil ls to the group of students being discussed Partial = key people

teaching students are absent. No = a meeting where the majority of teachers who teach the students are missing.

• Purpose of the meeting is stated (e.g “Today we are looking at progress monitoring data and making decisions about our groups.”) – or an agenda is handed out.

• Data to be reviewed is provided. (either on paper, LCD projector, computer, etc.). • Data being reviewed includes CBM early li teracy, oral reading fluency, and/or maze indicators of progress. Other

data may also be reviewed

• Progress graphs for individual students or small groups of students are shared. • There is discussion of student progress, lack of progress, or maintained progress for each student or small group of

students who are being progress monitored, or a subset of all students was pre-selected for discussion, and all those pre-selected were discussed. (partial = some but not all are discussed)

• Based on item 6, team members discuss possible reasons (hypotheses) for progress or lack of progress, and these hypotheses are alterable variables.

• Instructional changes proposed are linked to the hypotheses generated. • If teams are struggling with why a student(s) is not making progress with Tier 2 interventions, it is suggested they

consult with the RtI team or a representative of the team for additional considerations. If teams don’t struggle with intervention ideas for any students, mark ‘Yes’ .

• Changes in instructional groups are made explicit –who is teaching, what are the strategies/programs being taught, when is the instruction to be delivered, and when will it start? (partial = some but not all details discussed)

• Graphs have evidence of prior instructional changes if data indicate need for change– phase changes indicated on some graphs.

• Discussion of topics other than student data, progress and instructional planning is kept to a minimum. • An opportunity to discuss the progress of other students not currently receiving intervention and/or not currently

monitored is available (e.g. new students, students newly identifi ed at the winter screening period).

• Next meeting date is announced and is within 6 weeks of this date? P would be recorded if date is announced but not within 6 wks.

MN RtI Center, 2009

Facilitator Training

• 1 per grade level

• Stipend position

• August training - 1 day

• Monthly conference calls

• Facilitators to prepare data and lead meetings

Kerry BollmanAcademic Collaborative Planner

Reading Center Director

St. Croix River Education District

kbollman@scred.k12.mn.us

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.