9
2/23/2010 1 1. Articulate components of the Response to Intervention Initiative (RtI) 2. Cite the essential elements in providing services to ALL students including advanced learners to ALL students, including advanced learners 3. Acquire a template to design, implement, and evaluate your RtI Initiatives 4. Answer RtI questions in an interview 5. Pick the best from a school district that has an innovative model IDEA 2004 Recommendation General Education Initiative High quality, effective instruction -For ALL students Universal screening -Assessment for ALL students Targeted research-based interventions Individual students goals: Reading Math Social/Emotional, i.e. Behaviors Regularly monitored instruction

AASA Presentation 2 13 10.pptx [Read-Only]

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    3

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

2/23/2010

1

1. Articulate components of the Response to Intervention Initiative (RtI)

2. Cite the essential elements in providing services to ALL students including advanced learnersto ALL students, including advanced learners

3. Acquire a template to design, implement, and evaluate your RtI Initiatives

4. Answer RtI questions in an interview5. Pick the best from a school district that

has an innovative model

• IDEA 2004 Recommendation• General Education Initiative• High quality, effective instruction

-For ALL students•Universal screening

-Assessment for ALL students• Targeted research-based interventions• Individual students goals:

•Reading •Math•Social/Emotional, i.e. Behaviors

• Regularly monitored instruction

2/23/2010

2

•Tiered Instruction/Intervention-Tier I-Core, Universal Instruction: 80%-Tier II-Supplemental, Intervention: 15%-Tier III-Intensive: 5%

•Curriculum Based Assessment •Universal Screeners•Universal Screeners

- AIMSWeb- DIBELS- MAP

•Varied Interventions•Differentiated Instruction•Progress Monitoring

Tier 3 5% of Students

Tier 2

Tier 1

15% of Students

80% of Students

• Core Instruction• Interventions for

Students Outside Core• Tier II• Tier II

- Challenge Classes- Subject Level

Acceleration• Tier III

- Grade Level Acceleration

2/23/2010

3

Ad d

Subject Level Acceleration

One-on-One Help

Advanced Learners

Tier 1Tier 2

Tier 2Tier 3 Tier 3

Grade Level Acceleration

Struggling Students

Challenge Enrichment

Resource

2/23/2010

4

• School Board Members at 2007 IASB/IASA/IASBO Convention

• Superintendent Requested to Reinvent Delivery of Services for Reinvent Delivery of Services for Advanced Learners

• University Consultation• Task Force of Teachers, Board

Members, Superintendent, University Consultant

• RtI (Response to Intervention) Model as Vehicle for Change

•Student Selection

•Data Triangulation:ITBS: Iowa Test of Basic SkillsISAT: Illinois State Achievement TestAIMSWeb: Curriculum Based MeasuresRenzulli Teacher Rating ScaleCog AT: Cognitive Abilities Test

• Students Grouped for Reading

- Struggling Readers-Tier II and Tier III- Core Instruction-Tier I- Advanced Readers-Tier II and Tier

IIIIII

• Tier II- Reading Teacher- Challenge Program - Pull Out- Subject Acceleration

• Tier III - Intensive, i.e., Special Education

Services- Grade Level Acceleration

2/23/2010

5

• Focus GroupsParents, Teachers, Board Members, Administrators

• Questions Focused on: • Understanding of Goal: Reading Initiative

• Understanding of Implementation• Barriers and Solutions to Success

• Strengths of Model• Administrative Support

• Accountability Data• Observations

• All Groups Endorsed meeting the needs of Advanced Learners

• Enhanced Communication: • Endorsement of Grouping to meet Individual Needs• High Priority: Professional Development• Program Evaluation and Accountability• Early Diagnosis for All Students

2/23/2010

6

• Communicate and Market Program to all Stakeholders

• Develop an Accountability Plan• Provide Annual Program

Evaluation

Final Recommendations

Evaluation • Provide Professional

Development in Differentiation• Subject Level and/or Grade

Level Acceleration

• Instructional Minutes• Interventions

- Grouping of Students- Alternative Materials

• Core Materials Used Differently• CAI

• Progress Monitoring- AIMSWeb

• Intervention Meetings

Professional Development ◦ Differentiation of

I t tiInstructionAccountability◦ Number of Children

Moving Between Groups◦ Data Monitoring

ITBSAIMSWebSTAR ReadingISAT

2/23/2010

7

• School Board Requested - Follow-Up Focus Groups- Data

• Focus Groups Conducted in May 2009- Parents, Teachers, Board

Members, Administrators ANDAND Students

• Report sent to School Board & Superintendent - September 2009

• Initiative Perceived as Very Positive• Effective Communication Desired• On-going Professional Development

- Data Driven Decision Making- Diagnostic Assessments- Differentiation of Instruction- Additional Intervention Strategies

• Advanced Learners - More motivated & Reading More

• Subject Level Acceleration Working Well- Students Challenged and Enjoy classes

• Students applauded grouping practices• Parents perceive students are being

challenged• Issues

- More Transparent Criteria for Placement- Scheduling

2/23/2010

8

Final Recommendations• Communicate and Market Program to all

Stakeholders• Conduct Annual Program Evaluation• Provide Professional Development

- Data Driven Decision Making- Reading Instructional Strategies- Reading Instructional Strategies- Differentiation of Instruction

• Fine Tune Schedule & Selection Process• Offer Grouping for Mathematics• Additional Materials and Resources for

Exemplary Instruction.

Next Steps• On-Going Data Collection

- How Will We Know It’s Working?

• 8th Grade Curriculum for Subject Level

Accelerated Students-Virtual School

- High School Enrollment

• Service Delivery Model• Tiered Instruction• Formal Progress Monitoring• Continual Re-Assessment of

Interventions• Service Delivery Model

Effectiveness

2/23/2010

9

Bender, W.N. (2009). Beyond the RTI pyramid: Solutions for the first years of implementation. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Brown-Chidsey, R., & Steege, M.W. (2005). Response to intervention: Principles and strategies for effective practice. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Colangelo, N., Assouline, S.G., & Gross, M.U.M. (Eds.). (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students Washington DC: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline hold back America s brightest students. Washington, DC: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.

Ehren, B. J. , Ehren, T.C., & Proly, J.L. (2009). Response to intervention: An action guide for school leaders. Alexandria, VA: Educational Research Service.

Purcell, J. H., & Eckert, R.D. (Eds.). (2006). Designing services and programs for high-ability learners: A guidebook for gifted education. Thousand Oaks, CA: National Association for Gifted Children & Corwin Press.

Robinson, A., Shore, B.M., & Enersen, D.L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Inc.