Implementing RtI 2 at the Secondary Level: The Critical Role of Leadership Building Student Success: Response to Instruction Conference January, 2012 Judy

Implementing RtI2 at the Secondary Level:The Critical Role of Leadership

Building Student Success:

Response to Instruction Conference

January, 2012

Judy Elliott, Ph.D.

Former Chief Academic Officer

Los Angeles Unified School District

Session Goals

• Continue dialogue with the lens of Secondary

• Importance of vertical articulation

• Is Core all it should be?

• Importance of courageous conversations about Beliefs

The Change Model

Consensus

InfrastructureImplementation

RtI² Essential Components• Multi-tiered framework•Problem-solving process •Data-based decision-making• Academic engaged time•Professional development

RtI

Stages of Implementing Problem-Solving/RtI2

• Consensus

– Belief is shared

– Vision is agreed upon

– Implementation requirements understood

• Infrastructure Development

– Problem-Solving Process

– Data System

– Policies/Procedures

– Training/Technical Assistance

– Tier I and II intervention systems

• e.g., K-3 Academic Support Plan

– Technology support

– Decision-making criteria established

• Implementation

School Consensus

• School consensus is long-term and on-going

• RtI² allows staff to have a stake in the design of what RtI² looks like at their school

5

Foundations and Basic Assumptions

Middle- and High-SchoolApplication of RtI2

• SAME critical components should be present K-12

• Implementation of the critical components will look different at the middle-and high-school levels.

• The differences are influenced by the organization of the level, type and focus of curriculum, logistics of scheduling at the middle- and high-school levels.

Areas of “Same” and “Different” At the Secondary Level

Same• Problem-Solving Process

• School-Based Leadership Teams

• Data Days to Evaluate “Health and Wellness”

• Data Matrix

• Multi-Tiered System

• Fidelity

Different• Consensus

• Monitor Skills and Content

• Types of data

• Schedule Development

• Integration of the Tiers

• Student Involvement

• Fidelity

Some “Givens”• Middle- and High-School teams “inherit” the strengths

and weaknesses (and Gaps) students bring to the level

• Successful high school performance begins with kindergarten

• Most successful high school “intervention” is to ensure that students enter with as much strength as possible

• The best high-school “screening” tool is the compilation of data in K-8

Some “Givens”• Vertical Programming—articulation K-12- is the

most effective way of ensuring that students are prepared for high school

• Middle- and High-School staff should know student needs at least 12-16 month ahead of time.

• An agreed upon “method” of vertical communication of student data/needs—that leads to vertical programming– is critical

Differences in Consensus Building between Elementary and Secondary Schools

• The “Compelling Why” of RtI2 Implementation is different for Secondary Schools– Elementary consensus building typically begins with the

identification of specific academic problems (e.g., Reading)• All teachers typically teach reading and thus reading issues are seen as

relevant to everyone

– Consensus is more complex to develop at the secondary level where most personnel are content specific and generally most interested only in their own content area

– Even cross-content problems (e.g., student literacy) do not typically constitute a strong enough hook to build consensus around the need for RtI2 Implementation

• Teacher autonomy and isolation reinforces the idea that even cross-content problems are someone else’s problem

Framework for Change

**Consensus Building throughout the Phases

Consensus Building in Secondary Schools

• Consensus building often begins by redefining the mission of the school to include graduation for all students.

• All staff contribute to the preparation of students for successful completion of high school.

• All high schools have graduation data readily available and most current graduation rates are significantly different from what staff would expect or desire.

• Redefining Middle School’s mission to include preparing students to successfully complete high school will help to strengthen vertical articulation and the effectiveness of feeder patterns

Mission Statement:XXXXX High School

XXXXX High School creates a sound educational environment that provides all students the opportunity to develop their individual talents, to meet and exceed graduation requirements, and to become productive citizens in an increasingly complex and global society


XXXXX High School creates a sound educational environment that provides all students the opportunity to develop their individual talents, to meet and exceed graduation requirements, and to become productive citizens in an increasingly complex and global society


XXXXX High School creates a sound educational environment that provides all students the skills and habits of mind to meet and exceed graduation requirements and to become productive citizens in an increasingly complex and global society

Consensus Building in Secondary Schools• Developing an Early Warning System will assist schools in

establishing a need for early identification of at-risk students, tiered intervention, progress monitoring, and data-based decision making

– Compare the percent of students who are off-track for graduation or at-risk for high school dropout to the school’s mission of graduating all students

– Discuss the impact of course failures, student engagement, and retentions on student graduation rates

– Discuss the advantage of keeping students on track for graduation instead of reacting only after they have become significantly off-track

High Off TrackLacking 2 or more graduation requirementsBehind 4 or more CreditsCurrently failing 3 or more classesExcessive Referrals and/or Absences

Extreme Off Track 2-3 Years BehindNo chance for graduation in a traditional school settingDisengagement

At Risk for Off TrackLacking 1 of 3 Graduation requirements< 5%Absences3 or less Level 1 or 2 referrals

On TrackExceeding or Meeting all graduation requirements (Credits, FCAT Score, GPA)6 or less AbsencesNo referrals

Off Track Lacking 2 graduation requirementsBehind 1-3 Credits10% Absences3 or less Level 2 referrals or 2 Level 3 Referrals9th graders indentified “at high risk” (3 F’s in 8th grade)

Example: Credits Earned

1st Semester

09-10 < 3 Credits

08-09 < 9 Credits

07-08 <15 Credits

06-07 < 21 Credits

Pasco County Schools

Early Warning Systems Data: School Example

52.8% (210) of last year's 9th graders are off-track for graduation• 19% (75) are off-track due to failed FCAT, Credits and GPA• 13% (52) of exiting 9th graders failed 3 or more courses

o Almost all of these students are part of the lowest 25%o Many of these students will count in the total graduation and at-

risk graduation rateso These students have less than a 15% chance of graduating

without significant intervention

Course Failures• Algebra 1 - 43.5%• Spanish 1 - 45%• World History- 29%• English 1 - 28%• Health - 58 students- 17%

on-tr

ack

at-r

isk

off-t

rack

drop

out

12th Grade

9th Grade

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Early Warning Systems: 10/11 Beginning of Year

12th Grade

11th Grade

10th Grade

9th Grade

Grade 9On Track: 348At Risk: 39Off Track: 53Dropout: 0%




XXX High School

ODR Progress and Goal

7615

5414

2000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

2008-2009 2009-2010 Goal

ODRs

More than 2100 Hours (351 Days) of Instructional Time Recouped during 2009-2010 School Year

School is on-track to meet 2010-2011 Goal

XXX High School

% of Students with Excessive Absences

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

2008-2009 2009-2010 Goal

20 or More

40 or More

School is not currently on-track to meet absenteeism goal and is in the process of revising the intervention plan

XXX High School

Percent of 9th Grade Students with 1 or More Fs

0%

5%10%

15%

20%25%

30%

35%

40%45%

50%

2009-2010 Sem. 1 2010-2011 Sem. 1

School has added 1 hour to the school day to provide tiered intervention services for Algebra 1 and English 1

On TrackAt Risk for off track

Off TrackHigh Off Track

Extreme Off Track

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Jan-10

Jul-10

Jan-11

51

27

8 11

3

60

23

9

6

2

84

5 9

11

E.W.S over time Team 08

Jan-10Jul-10Jan-11

2011 Cohort: EWS Data

Critical Issues-Overview

Academic Calendars

• SBLT Meetings

• Grade-/Department-Level Meetings

• Data Days

– Minimum of 3 per year

• Professional Development and Support

• Outcome Sharing Events

– Communication and Celebration

Schedules

• Maximize academic engaged time in critical areas

• Reflect needs of students

• Maximize use of all staff

• Ensure time allocated for Tiers 1, 2 and 3

• Provide meeting time for tier integration work

Development of Schedules

• How many students require immediate interventions—by grade level?– Preteach - Reteach Periods– Extra scoops (Double Dips)

• How many students require “moderate risk” interventions—time and focus?

• How many students require “high risk proximal and distal interventions ?

Schedule Development

• Schedules are driven by how many students need how much time of what.

• Schedules cannot be developed successfully without this basic information.

Middle/High School Dilemma

• Deadly combination

– Poor Skill Development

– Limited or No Productivity (work completed, practice)

• How do you remediate gaps and provide students with access to content simultaneously?

• How do you sustain student engagement when skill gaps are significant?

Instructional Strategies and School Schedules

• Immediate Instruction/Intervention Strategies– What they need now– Increase supervision and/or lower the level of

difficulty

• Eventual Instruction/Intervention Strategies– Target development of skills– Require time to develop

Immediate Strategies

• Preview-Review-Reteach

– Requires schedules to permit intervention in the period prior to the target class

• “Double-Dip” or Double Block

– Requires schedules to permit back-to-back schedule of target class with same teacher

• “Alternate Core”

– Requires separate class to provide supervision

• Tier 1 Supports—e.g., computer assisted instruction

Eventual/Distal Strategies

• Multi-year intervention plan to close gap

• Integration of interventions across all providers

• Integration of core content with all interventions

• Perhaps modification of post-secondary trajectory

Evaluate•Response to Instruction & Intervention (RtI2)

Problem Analysis•Validating Problem•Identify Variables that contribute to problem•Develop Plan

Define the Problem•Defining Problem/Directly Measuring Behavior

Implement Plan•Implement As Intended•Progress Monitor•Modify as Necessary

Problem Solving Process

Steps in the Problem-Solving Process

1. Problem Identification

– Identify replacement behavior

– Data- current level of performance

– Data- benchmark level(s)

– Data- peer performance

– Data- GAP analysis

2. Problem Analysis

– Develop hypotheses (brainstorming)

– Develop predictions/assessment

Step 1 - What’s the Problem?

In order to identify a problem, you’ve got to start with three pieces of data:

1. Benchmark level of performance

2. Peer level of performance

3. Student level of performance

Is this an individual student problem or a larger systemic problem?

Decision Making Rubricfor use w ith

School-Wide Screening

Are over 20% of students

struggling?

Are between 5% and 20% of Are 5% or fewer

and developgroup

intervention

Examine instruction,

curriculum, and environment for

needed adaptations

Develop small group

intervention

Go to individualstudent problem

solving

Go to intervention

evaluation

studentsstruggling?

studentsstruggling?

Step 1 - What’s the Problem?

35%

Benchmark 80%

= Peer Group = Aim Line

BASELINE

Classroom Behavioral Data

= Student

The Health of Tier 1

H

Student 1 Intensive 161

Student 2 Intensive 335

Student 3 Strategic 448















Student 18 Benchmark 826







Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI)

Which students may require additional instruction and/or intervention?

TIER I: Core, UniversalAcademic and Behavior

42

GOAL: 100% of students achieve at high levels

Tier I: Implementing well researched programs and practices demonstrated to produce good outcomes for the majority of students.Tier I: Effective if at least 80% are meeting benchmarks with access to Core/Universal Instruction.Tier I: Begins with clear goals:1.What exactly do we expect all students to learn ?2.How will we know if and when they’ve learned it?3.How you we respond when some students don’t learn?4.How will we respond when some students have already learned?

Questions 1 and 2 help us ensure a guaranteed and

viable core curriculum

Tier 1: Critical Questions

• What percent of students receiving only Tier 1 are proficient?– Those who are not are falling through the cracks

• What percent of students receiving only Tier 1 are proficient by NCLB category?

• How effective is core instruction?

• Remember, Tiers 2 and 3 cannot accommodate more than 20% of students. If more than 20% of students are not proficient, then...

Tier 1 Data Analysis-Building Level:Step 1

• Identify the number and names of students who are in core instruction 100% of the time.

• Identify the number and names of students who receive supplemental instruction.

• Identify the number and names of students who receive intensive instruction.

• Calculate the % of students who receive only Tier 1, core instruction.

– Is this at, above or below 80%?

• Same for Tiers 2 and 3?

– What does the distribution look like? A triangle, a rectangle?


• What % of Tier 1 students made proficiency?



• What was the overall % of students who made proficiency?

• Calculate by disaggregated groups.

Data Example• 75% of students receiving only Tier 1 instruction are proficient

(70% of the school).

– What does this mean to you? How do you prioritize these students?

– 52.5% of students are proficient

– 17.5 % of students are not proficient & are not receiving additional services—Falling through the cracks.

42% of students receiving Tier 2 (22% of school) & Tier 1 are Profic. What does this say about the effectiveness of Tier 2 instruction & what does it say about overloading Tier 3?

9% of students are proficient

35% of students receiving Tier 3 (8% of school) are proficient.Is Tier 3 effective?

2.8% of students are proficient

Total % of school proficient: 52.5 + 9 + 2.8= 64.3


• By disaggregated groups, plot the % of students who made proficiency for the past 2 years.

• Calculate the % of average growth per year for each group.

– % proficient in year 3 minus % proficient in year 1 divided by 2 =average rate of increase in % of students making proficiency

Finding the Average Rate of Growth

2008-09 2009-20102010-11

56.4 62.1(53.6)

8.5% increase

3 years of data, but 2 data points


2011-12 Target = 87.0%

2008-09 2009-20102010-11

62.1 – 56.4 = 24.9

24.9 divided by 3 = 2.85% rate of growth

56.4 62.1(53.6)

Example

• Low Income Students 62.1%– Desired Level 87.0% (11-12)– Current level 62.1% (10-11)– Gap 24.9%– 2 year rate 2.85%

– 62.1 - 56.4 divided by 2 = 2.85%

(10-11) – (08-09)

It will take 8.7 years to close the gap at this rate


2011-12 Target = 87.0%

2008-09 2009-20102010-11

55.4 – 58.3 = 31.6

31.6 divided by 3 = -1.45% rate of growth

58.3 55.4(53.9)

Example

• Current African American - 55.4%– Desired Level 87.0% (11-12)– Current level 55.4% (10-11)– Gap 31.6%– 2 year rate -1.45%

– 55.4 - 58.3 divided by 2 = -1.45%

(08-09) - (10-11)

If it was +1.45 it would 21.7 years. But, it is -1.45. It will take longer.

White

Black

Hispan

ic

Economica

lly Disa

dvantag

ed

Engli

sh La

nguag

e Lea

rners

Studen

ts with

Disabiliti

es0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

Reading: Percent of Schools Meeting AYP Disaggregated by Subgroup

% meeting 09% meeting 10


• Are you happy with:– % of students in core who are proficient?– Same for each of the other Tiers.

• % of students in the three Tiers?

• Given that the national increase in % of students who move to proficiency is about 7%, how are you doing with the rate over the past years and what does this information mean to you for the next 2 years?– In 2014, 95% of students should be proficient

What Does Core Instruction Look Like for Behavior?

• School-wide Positive Behavior Support

• School-wide social skills/character skill education (e.g., Boys Town)

• School-Home collaboration and partnerships

• Active student engagement in promoting a prosocial environment (e.g., bully prevention)

• School-wide discipline plan that can be explained by both staff and students

What data can be collected to evaluate the effectiveness and quality of core instruction?

• Progress monitoring assessments 3x/year (Benchmarking)

• Ongoing Progress Monitoring

• Core Curriculum Unit Tests / Curriculum-based assessments/Common Assessments

• Outcome measures (District & State Tests) to make decisions about student placement for the following year

• Evaluation of quality of instruction

• Learner characteristics

• School environment

• Others??

57

Sources of Data • Academic performance

• Discipline data- Office discipline referrals (ODR)

• Records

• Referral history

• Observation

• PBS benchmark assessment

• School climate surveys

• Attendance data

• Instructional Quality Data

ScreeningAssessment

DiagnosticAssessment

ProgressMonitoringAssessment

Outcome(Summative)Assessment

Administered to all students as an initial baseline

While relatively lengthy, they provide an in-

depth, reliable assessment of targeted

skills

Given periodically to determine whether

students are making adequate progress

Given at the end of the school year

[and/or end of a unit of instruction]

Help to identify students who do not meet grade level expectations

Purpose is to provide information for more

effective instruction and interventions

Data should be collected, evaluated, and used on

an ongoing basis

Group-administered tests of important [skills and/or

standards]

Are quick and efficient measures of overall

ability and critical skills known to be strong

indicators that predict student performance

Because these assessments are time consuming and expensive, they should be administered far less

frequently than the other assessments

Provide information on the effectiveness of

instruction and to modify the intervention

if necessary

Often used for school, district, and/or state

reporting

Indicate a need for further evaluation

Specific subtests from these instruments might be

used to provide information not

assessed by [other assessments]

Used to analyze and interpret gaps between

benchmark and achievement

Give feedback of the overall effectiveness of the

instructional program

Modified from 6 Components of RtI²– Assessment/Progress Monitoring Colorado Department of Education www.cde.state.co.us/RtI/AssessMonitor.htm

http://www.cde.state.co.us/RtI/AssessMonitor.htm

Categorize Your Current School Assessments

Essential Beliefs

RtI2 is a general education framework

Improving the effectiveness of core instruction is basic to this process

Assessment (data) should both inform and evaluate the impact of instruction

School Policies must be consistent with beliefs

Beliefs must be supported by research

Each student must have access to core

Essential Beliefs

Proficiency is the goal for each student

Every student is everybody’s responsibility

Common commitment to instruction and intervention

Common commitment to school-based academic and behavior programs

Common commitment to problem-solving process

Common commitment to data-driven decision making

Reaching Consensus: Why Change?

Educators will embrace change when two conditions exist:

• They understand the need for change

• They perceive that they either have the skills or the support to implement change

In other words, when…

Belief is shared

Vision is agreed upon

Implementation requirements are understood

High School TeamsBeliefs Survey Data

10a. Th

e majo

rity o

f studen

ts with

SLD ac

hieve g

rade-l

evel

bench

marks in

Reading

10b. The m

ajorit

y of s

tudents

with SL

D achiev

e grad

e-lev

el ben

chmark

s in M

ath

11a. Th

e majo

rity o

f studen

ts with

EBD ac

hieve g

rade-l

evel

bench

marks in

Reading

11b. The m

ajorit

y of s

tudents

with EB

D achiev

e grad

e-lev

el ben

chmark

s in M

ath

12a. Stu

dents

receiv

ing EEN

servi

ces ca

n mee

t grad

el-lev

el ben

chmark

s in Rea

ding

12b. Studen

ts rec

eiving E

EN se

rvices

can m

eet g

rade-l

evel

bench

marks in

Math

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Beliefs Survey Data – High School SBLTs Factor One: Academic Ability & Performance of Students with Disabilities

HS Teams ES & MS staff

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

AgreeNeutralDisagree

Beliefs Survey Data: High School SBLTsFactor Three: Functions of Core and Supplemental Instruction

HS teams ES & MS staff

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

AgreeNeutralDisagree

23: Additional time and resources should be allocated first to those students who are not at benchmarks (i.e., general education standards) before significant time and resources are directed to students who are at or above benchmarks.

Beliefs Survey Data: MMSD High School SBLTsIndividual Item (N=51)

15.70%

33%

51.00%Disagree Neutral

Agree

HS teams ES & MS staff

15.70%

33%

51.00%

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

29%

26%

45%DisagreeNeutralAgree

23: Additional time and resources should be allocated first to those students who are not at benchmarks (i.e., general education standards) before significant time and resources are directed to students who are at or above benchmarks.

National Resources to Support District and School Implementation

• Betterhighschools.org

• www.floridarti.usf.edu

• www.florida-rti.org

• www.nasdse.org

• www.rtinetwork.org

• www.rti4success.org

http://www.floridarti.usf.edu/

http://www.floridarti.usf.edu/

http://www.florida-rti.org/

http://www.nasdse.org/

http://www.rtinetwork.org/

http://www.nasdse.org/

Documents

Implementing RtI 2 at the Secondary Level: The Critical Role of Leadership Building Student Success: Response to Instruction Conference January, 2012 Judy