RTI Lessons Learned 2008
Petrea Hagen-GildenTigard-Tualatin School District 23J
Purpose Participants will be exposed to
information about Practices that we have found to be
supportive of successful implementation of RTI; and
Practices that we have found not productive; and
Some developments in thinking about Title I & CEIS
Participants can ask questions and ask for recommendations
Experience is simply the name we give our mistakes.
Oscar Wilde
TTSD district experience
Implementation visits to OrRTI districts
Sources
Lessons It’s ok to do “BIG” RTI without doing “little” RTI Don’t try to get ready and then start Eventually you will need to jump off the cliff Principals are key players Learning disability expertise is imperative Decision rules rule Train, train, train, and SUPPORT People don’t know what they don’t know
“BIG” or “little” RTI?
“BIG” or “little” RTI?
Big RTI is: the system of Multi-Tiered Instruction (MTI?) that
applies to all students the foundation
Little RTI: is the “procedure” in IDEA to determine whether a
child has an SLD or not cannot exist without BIG RTI
THIS DISTINCTION IS IMPORTANT IN HELPING EDUCATORS UNDERSTAND RTI!!
Daisy is part of a class that is part of a school that conducts DIBELS
screening three times a year—for EVERY child—and she isn’t doing well
Daisy receives highly structured
additional instruction—but
she doesn’t progress
Daisy’s interventio
n is intensified
Does Daisy progress? If not, should
she be referred for a
special education
evaluation?
It’s just that simple. . .but it takes:
Resource realignment Leadership Core curriculum Integration of programs Continuous monitoring
You will hit more than one brick wall
“Brick walls are there for a reason: They are there to show how badly we
want things” Randy Pausch
Our Current Brick Wall
“You can’t ‘do’ RTI in a Targeted Assistance School”
WHY? “If students in Non-Title Schools receive the
same interventions as students in Targeted Schools, it amounts to ‘Supplanting’”
We respectfully disagree
Title $$ Tests
Comprability Supplement, don’t supplant:
Paying for something from Title I that used to come from local funds
Paying for something with Title I that is required by another law
Paying for something with Title I that is paid for in non Title schools with general funds (‘the same thing’)
Our Take on It It doesn’t make sense:
Giving kids something they don’t need Withholding something kids do need
The law says: “When determining whether Title I funding is
supplemental, an SEA or LEA may exclude State and local funds expended in any school for carrying out a program that meets the intent and purposes of Title I, Part A. (These exclusions also apply when determining whether Title I and non-Title I schools are comparable.)”
“
AND you know if it is such a program if the program:
“Serves only students who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the State's challenging student academic achievement standards;
• Provides supplementary services designed to meet the special educational needs of students whoare participating in the program to support their achievement toward meeting the State’s student academic achievement standards; and
• Uses the State’s system of assessment under 34 CFR 200.2 to review the effectiveness of the program”
[Section 1120A(d) and 34 CFR 200.79]
Coordinated Early Intervening Services
CEIS = K through 12, K-3 emphasis NOT sped students May include:
Professional development Educational and behavioral evaluations Services and supports
(all must be scientifically based)
$$ Considerations
MAY use up to 15% MUST use 15% if significant dis-
proportionality found Cannot be focused on group for whom dis-
proportionality is found May cause Maintenance of Effort issues
Should align with ESEA, but cannot supplant ESEA funds
So. . .
You can “do” RTI in a TAS school if you don’t supplant under NCLB and ESEA and of course you can use CEIS as long as you think about whether it will effect your MOE, and taking into consideration your obligations to provide FAPE in the LRE.
Just be sure you target the students correctly
Jumping off the cliff. . .
Don’t be a commitment-phobe Prerequisites:
Deal with core curriculum issues Make non-negotiables clear
Establish clear rules related to legal concerns
Write procedures
Create the expectation for change
Principals
Set expectations and model: Commitment to core curriculum Teaming Flexibility Commitment to RTI
Attend ALL meetings Hold individuals accountable Articulate process to constituents
Learning Disability Expertise
Shifting the “diagnostic” paradigm
Building up other special educators
Providing perspective Responding to skeptics TRAINING
Decision Rules
It’s a “test” Identification can’t be arbitrary Ensure students don’t get lost Essential to program evaluation
✔
✔
✔
✔
Train, Train, Train The Case for Urgency Using Data Progress Monitoring Fidelity
Core Interventions Procedures
Teaming Learning Disability Reports New Employees
Making Assumptions about What People Know. . .
Train Check understanding frequently
Attend meetings Coach Examine products Keep data
Be wary of SELF-EVALUATIONS
What do our Data Say?Reading/Literature
So, you are welcome to our successes and mistakes!
It's a wise man who profits by his own experience, but it's a good deal wiser one who lets the rattlesnake bite the other fellow.
Josh Billings