RtI: One Principal’s Journey

SW Superintendent Summit October 17, 2008

Sherri Maxwell, Principal Dolores Elem. School

sherri_maxwell@dolores.k12.co.us

As an elementary teacher…• What I taught was primarily my

decision within the parameters of our reading and math series.

• I “melded” what I wanted to teach with our grade level standards.

• My grade level peers and I worked together to develop our program.

• Our program was “staff specific.” When teachers moved on, the program changed to reflect new team members.

• Struggling students were referred “out” to Title One or Special Ed. .

As a special education teacher… • We viewed struggling students as lacking

as learners rather than investigating the efficacy of our curriculum or our teaching.

• The referral process was a formality with the goal of “getting” students “into” the special education program.

• As a teacher I worked within six different grade-level standards for each core subject and fifteen individual classroom curriculums.

• IEPs were often developed around the needs of the teachers (schedules) and often reflected differing educational philosophies.

As an elementary principal..• I knew we needed to come together

as a staff to develop a common philosophy about our teaching and student achievement.

• I knew we needed to articulate our core curriculum so it would become “guaranteed and viable.”

• I knew that we needed a systems approach to student achievement … including behavioral expectations

• I knew we needed a systematic approach to providing prescriptive interventions for students who were not meeting the standards.

My questions to my staff…– What are our common beliefs

about student learning?– What are the essential skills for

each grade level in the core content areas?

– How do we guarantee our curriculum is taught with fidelity?

– What do we do when students don’t make adequate progress in meeting their grade-level expectations?

– How can I support our students and our staff as we embark on this journey?

Outcomes for today:

• Share our vision and our journey in implementing RtI, PLC, and PBS by: – Sharing our understanding

of the RtI construct.– Sharing how we welded

PLCs, PBS, and RtI into a comprehensive “package.”

– Sharing organizational ideas and frameworks.

Disclaimers…• We are partially proficient in

implementing a comprehensive RtI program. There are many obstacles we have yet to overcome. I will do my best to illustrate these as we go.

• I do not have a lot of practical knowledge of secondary school systems, however I firmly believe many of our applications could be implemented by core departments.

First Question…

• What is it that we want our students to learn?– Belief statements

• Reading, math, student writing, and interventions.

– Yet to go: Science, PBS

– Curriculum Alignment:• PLCs 2006-2007, 2007-2008

– Colorado Model Content Standards

– Assessment frameworks (CSAP)

– NWEA guidelines– Other sources/materials

PLC Construct: Student Writing

• 2006-2007– Align standards two and three – Identify grade level “knows and dos”

• 2007-2008– Develop grade-level writing rubrics

• 2008-2009– Use a PLC model to identify students as “beyond,

on, approaching, and intensive

• Yet to do:– Develop CBM measures (common assessments)– Use RtI to develop interventions for students

identified as intensive. – Identify intervention resources

PLC Construct: Reading • 2006-2007

– Develop the “What We Believe About Reading” statement

– Begin to align standards one, four, five and six

• 2007-2008– Begin to identify grade level “knows and dos”

for standards one, four, five, and six– Develop the “What We Believe About

Interventions” statements

• 2008-2009– Complete standards one, four, five, and six

• Yet to do:– Assessments: Benchmark and CBM– Identify intervention resources

PLC Construct: Science

• 2006-2007– Begin to align standards – Identify grade level knows and dos

• 2007-2008• 2008-2009• Yet to do:

– Everything!!– What We Believe Statement– Assessments: Benchmarks and CBM– Identify intervention resources

PLC Construct: Math• 2006-2007• 2007-2008

– Develop the “What We Believe About Math” statement

– Begin to align standards

• 2008-2009– Complete alignment of standards to

State Standards (CSAP)– Identify grade level knows and dos

• Yet to do:– Assessments: Benchmark and CDM– Identify intervention resources

PLC Construct: Positive Behavior Support

• 2007-2008– Identify school-wide construct: Respect,

responsibility, relationships, and safety– Teach expectations on a regular basis– Identify and recognize students who meet

and exceed expectations– Develop a protocol for students entering tier

two

• 2008-2009– In-serve teachers on common concerns

• Behavior plans• Functional Behavior Assessments

• Yet to do:– Community involvement

Next Question…

• What do we do when students have not yet learned what we have identified as essential skills?

• Answer: RtI- Response to Intervention

RtI: Universal Level • Critical benchmarking occurs three to

four times per year to identify student proficiency.

• Collect group data within PLCs using formal and informal CBM (the quiz) based assessments. Students are categorized as being beyond level, on level, approaching level, and intensive level.

• PLC teams identify the successful strategies used to meet the needs of students (80%).

RtI: Intervention Level • Within the PLC, identify the learning

needs of students scoring less than proficient. We pay particular attention to students in the intensive category.

• Problem-solving strategies and supports needed to boost individual student performance.

• Develop a plan to meet the identified needs.– Formal plans: ILPS, behavior plans,

IEPs count!– Alpine Achievement: Plan builder– Paper and pencil

Progress Monitoring• Identify how student progress will be

monitored. • Schedule specific intervals to take

“probes.” Record projected dates on the plan prior to beginning the plan.

• Probes need to be specific and constant. Work samples count!!!

• Provide students with intensive support in accordance to their plan. In order to be considered intensive, the intervention needs to occur on a regular basis and with fidelity.

• Complete and record data in accordance to the plan.

What now?• If the student continues to not meet the

learning target after a minimum of 8 probes, the plan may be rewritten.

• We may refer the student to the RtI team for further support.

• The RtI team may recommend targeted assessment to help identify student needs. This is not a special education process or referral: it is strictly problem solving.

• If sufficient interventions have been identified and implemented, a formal referral may be recommended by the RtI team. This occurs only after all other avenues have been exhausted.

The Truth…• Where we actually are with this….

– Benchmarking– Record keeping

• Identified interventions• Responsibilities

– Progress monitoring

• Barriers…– Leadership– Teacher commitment – Teacher workload– Teacher training– TIME!!!!

Organization organization…• Data Team

– Meets every other week

– Oversees the vertical alignment – “Gear” that runs the PLCs (PLC meet weekly)

• RtI Team – Meets weekly– BOY and EOY meets with every grade level

team to review assessments, RtI plans, and students new to the school

– Meets throughout the year to support RtI and classroom teachers

• Identify intervention and supports• Identify further assessment needs• Refer to Tier Three if needed

Management

• Curriculum Notebooks Grade-Level Specific– Standards– Grade level “Knows and Dos”– Content area benchmarks– CBM as developed

• Yellow Notebooks (Language Arts): – Due quarterly – Benchmarks– “No Excuses” spelling words– Fluency

Scheduling

• Academic Calendar– Set at the start of the year– Includes all academic activities– Includes assessment windows– Sets critical PLC topics

• Master schedule– Block scheduling for reading and

math– Sets intervention period

• Intervention schedule

Resources• Jim Wright: RtI Toolkit: A Practical Guide

for Schools• Larry Ainsworth: Unwrapping the

Standards: A Simple Process to Make Standards Manageable

• Bruce Wellman and Laura Lipton: Data Driven Dialogue: A Facilitator’s Guide to Collaborative Inquiry

• Mike Smoker: Results Now: How We Can Achieve Unprecedented Improvements in Teaching and Learning

• Gayle H. Gregory and Lin Kuzmich: Teacher Teams that Get Results: 61 Strategies for Sustaining and Renewing Professional Learning Communities

Resources Continued• CDE Resources

– RtI Comprehensive Evaluation Tool: CDE Website download

– (RtI) Response to Intervention: Meeting the needs of All students (CD 2008)

– Response to Intervention (RtI): Strategies for Reading and Math (CD Videoconference, March 14, 2007)

– Response to Intervention (RtI) Non-Academic Barriers to Achievement Addressing School Based Mental Health and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (CD NASDE Videoconference May 9, 2007)