N50 PRIN C IPAL Leadership J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 8

j a n u a r y 2 0 0 8 PrinciPal Leadership 51

NEEDresponding to

preview new federal legislation calls for a response to intervention model for determining special education services on the basis of demonstrated need.

Teams of educators compile data using a three-tier model of intervention to determine education strategies.

Ongoing monitoring of students’ progress enables educators to refine interventions to improve student outcomes.

herry transferred to Sunfl ower High School late in the spring of her freshman year. Her records showed that she had barely passed her classes at her previous school. She did little work during the last four weeks of her freshman year and failed all of her classes. Her teachers suspect-ed that Sherry needed special education services. In the fall, Sherry retook the classes she failed. Again she exerted little effort and, when assisted, seemed to not understand what she was being taught. One teacher suggested that Sherry might be mentally retarded. As the semester progressed, Sherry seemed content to passively sit in class. Although she appeared busy at times, she was not making any aca-demic progress. She was referred to a homework assistance class for at-risk students, but it did not help. She said she was leaving school as soon as she turned 16.

It became clear that Sherry had similar environmental, socioeconomic, and academic struggles as other at-risk students. Her parents agreed to have Sherry tested. On a comprehensive evaluation, her IQ and achievement scores

By Kelly Arnberger and Robert J. Shoop

were both low-average. Because she did not demonstrate a severe discrepancy between her intellectual ability and her achievement, she did not qualify for special education. But her teachers knew that unless something was done soon, Sherry was not going to graduate—in fact, it was unlikely that she would fi nish the school year.

Response to InterventionSince the turn of the century, U.S. education policies have focused on accountability and student progress. Two major pieces of federal legislation—No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004)—pose several legal issues that educators must contemplate as they strive to be accountable and meet the needs of all students. In particu-lar, the insertion of provisions recommending aspects of response to intervention (RTI) into IDEA 2004 generated several new issues that schools must consider.

Defi ned as “an objective examination of the cause-effect relationship(s) between academic or behavioral

S

52 PrinciPal Leadership j a n u a r y 2 0 0 8

intervention and the student’s response to the intervention” (Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2005, p. 2), RTI is a tiered approach that educators can use to help students who struggle academically and exhibit at-risk behavior. The National Association of State Directors of Special Education (2006) defi nes RTI as “the practice of (1) providing high-quality instruc-tion/intervention matched to student needs and (2) using learning rate over time and level of performance to (3) make important education decisions” (p. 5) and as “the approach that various researchers have advocated to replace severe discrepancy as one of the key criteria for identifying students with SLD (Specifi c Learning Disability)” (Zirkel, 2006, p. 4). RTI will either help students who have not been identifi ed using the discrepancy model or document their need for special education services.

Legal Considerations for schoolsAppropriate instruction. IDEA states that schools may not determine that a student has a disability if the deter-mining factor is “lack of appropri-ate instruction in reading, including the essential components of reading instruction” [20 U.S.C. § 1414(b)(5)(A)]. Schools may not claim that a stu-dent did not respond to interventions and identify the student as eligible for services if the regular education instruction did not meet the criteria found in NCLB.

This is the most important com-ponent of IDEA and NCLB concerning identifi cation. Teachers must employ differentiated strategies to meet the needs of all students. This can be a daunting task for secondary teachers who must teach within a traditional schedule. To be successful in a second-ary school, an RTI model must take this into consideration.

Lack of models. There is limited research on RTI methods for second-ary schools. Current interventions and strategies focus on identifying students who have learning disabilities as early as possible; therefore, it is not the norm to identify students who have specifi c learning disabilities in second-ary schools.

Under the discrepancy model, however, some students do fi lter into secondary school classrooms before they are identifi ed because their achievement levels and IQ are not clearly disparate. Incorporating RTI procedures in general education class-rooms will ensure that such students receive the support they need and also help educators identify students who have not responded to well-planned strategies and interventions. In such cases, RTI procedures can provide strong evidence that the school

has made every effort to help those students and that they need special education.

RTI Model ConsiderationsAll RTI models must include six criti-cal components:n Universal screeningn Measurable defi nition of problem

arean Baseline data that has been estab-

lished before an interventionn A written plan that details

accountabilityn Progress monitoringn Comparison of pre-intervention

data to post-intervention data for effi cacy (McCook, 2005). To meet the criteria for universal

screening, an RTI model must have a team approach. Secondary schools are different from elementary schools in that several teachers will see each student throughout the day, and indi-vidual teachers may not know that the student is experiencing diffi culty in more than one class. An RTI team that has a team coordinator will encourage the compilation and documentation of data. Team members will have sev-eral different perspectives for examin-ing data and can offer peer-assisted resources to teachers who are having diffi culties with referred students.

The team should develop a screen-ing process that gathers as much information about the student as pos-sible. The data analysis should focus on defi ning a problem area that can be measured (the second component). The data analysis becomes the base-line that provides an accurate look at the student’s achievement before implementing any interventions (the third component).

The fourth component of a suc-cessful RTI program is the establish-ment of a written plan that details

Th ree tier Modeln Primary intervention includes

programs and services that are designed for all students.

n Secondary intervention provides additional strategies for those students who do not respond to primary prevention methods.

n Tertiary intervention encom-passes methods and procedures for one-on-one intervention for students who do not respond to tier two interventions.

j a n u a r y 2 0 0 8 PrinciPal Leadership 53

the strategies to be implemented and how accountability will be assigned. The plan should include the baseline data and the tier one interventions—those that have been provided to all students. If tier one strategies have not been successful, the team recom-mends tier two strategies and develops a detailed plan for the student and his or her teachers.

The fifth component, progress monitoring, is the most important aspect of the RTI plan. The team is instrumental in helping teachers measure growth and check the efficacy of the tier two interventions. The team should meet approximately every two weeks to check on the progress of the students who have been referred to the RTI team. Teachers provide updated information to the team, which the team compiles and analyzes to pro-vide concise data on the students to the teachers. This system ensures that all adults stay focused on the needs of the students. Comparisons of pre-intervention and post-intervention data, component six, help the team determine the efficacy of the strategies that have been employed.

The Three TiersMany RTI models use a three-tier strategy. The most effective RTI models are those that are designed to meet the unique needs of specific schools, how-ever, and those models may include more than three tiers of intervention.

Tier one. Primary interventions are made up of programs and services that are designed for all students. Secondary schools can develop a wide variety of tier one interventions that meet NCLB and IDEA 2004 require-ments through inservice training.

The baseline data should identify the general education programs that have been employed. If none have

been used, the team should recom-mend strategies for the teacher to em-ploy before considering more-intense interventions. In many cases, teachers will have developed and are comfort-able with strategies that work for the majority of students. Many times, a strategy that is suggested on the basis of the compiled data will help a stu-dent achieve at a level commensurate with his or her peers. It is important that the teacher and the team keep detailed records of achievement so that if the student does not respond to the intervention, another strategy may be tried. If the student still does not respond, the team should consider tier two strategies.

Tier two. Secondary strategies are secondary interventions. These interventions are more intense than whole-class strategies and may even require that a student be enrolled in a class that deals with specific areas of weakness. For example, a student who has problems reading and has not been able to progress in the regular curriculum may be assigned to a developmental reading class. The developmental reading class should be small and focus on teaching read-ing skills. It is best to have a reading specialist who is versed in secondary reading strategies teach the class. If none are available, a strong secondary teacher can provide instruction and use many of the interactive reading programs available through vari-ous vendors. Should the student not respond to tier two strategies, the team may suggest that the student receive tier three intervention.

Tier three. Tertiary interventions are one-on-one strategies and require that teachers make further attempts to meet the student at his or her level of achievement. Schools may use before- or after-school programs to meet the

needs of students in tier three, but these students may exhibit behaviors that make spending extra time at school difficult or impossible. Tier three interventions will likely be more successful if one-on-one opportunities are provided within the school day.

special RTI ConsiderationsBehavior. Many of the difficul-ties that hinder students’ academic performance are behavior related, so it is prudent to consider interventions that are based on behavior. Students who have had difficulty functioning may have stopped trying or developed compensatory behaviors to avoid being singled out. Schools must look at the basic needs of each student. They must also teach students skills that will enable them to advocate for themselves.

Experienced teachers understand that some students will demonstrate avoidance behavior, such as failing to respond to questioning in class, refusing to do a project, or lying about meeting after school for extra assis-tance. Many students are well versed in offering excuses for failing to follow directions or complete their course work. Although such behavior is dis-couraging, teachers must not hesitate to provide appropriate interventions. It may be necessary for the RTI team to assign adult advocates to teach students how to ask for the help they need from their teachers and also talk directly to teachers to help them reex-amine how they perceive the student.

Emotional problems. For stu-dents who demonstrate emotional issues during school, an intervention model that addresses these emotional issues is necessary. Most emotional issues are short-term, but they can affect academics. The RTI team should

54 PrinciPal Leadership j a n u a r y 2 0 0 8

also be prepared to help students who demonstrate emotional issues that are not resolved after a short period of time.

Recommendations for RTI ProgramsSkills programs. Students who do not perform at grade level need as-sistance with specifi c skills. There are a variety of computerized skills pro-grams that are diagnostic and prescrip-tive, such as Virtual Prescriptive Learn-ing, PLATO, and Pass Key. Although these may be effective in helping students improve academically, they should be used with caution. At-risk students cannot be counted upon to do skills work at home, and placing students in front of a computer and expecting them to magically develop the self-motivation to learn the skills is not a well-conceived plan.

Students must have time dur-ing the school day to work on the programs with the guidance of an involved teacher. The skills classes must also be dedicated to skills, not homework. Many times at-risk classes provided in secondary schools end up being homework tutoring sessions. For students who do not have the

necessary skills, more homework help will not result in actual improvement in achievement.

Before- and after-school pro-grams. A common complaint of sec-ondary teachers is that students do not complete their homework. Providing before- and after-school opportunities for students to work with teachers on homework will eliminate the major-ity of homework issues. Homework programs also help teachers identify students who may not be doing their homework because of their skills defi -cits. These students can be referred to the RTI team and a plan can be set up to help those students.

Assistive technology consul-tant. Assistive technology may be as simple as using a calculator to fi nd multiplication facts, but implement-ing assistive technology is an area many general education teachers may not fi rmly grasp or may even have an aversion to. “The benefi ts of assistive technology are widely accepted, and most states have information available about assistive programs—that data and direction does not fi lter down to the district or school levels” (Walton, 2006). According to a National As-sistive Technology Research Institute (NATRI) study, 92% of states have policies in place to deal with assistive technologies, but unfortunately, many teachers are unaware of these docu-ments (Walton, 2006).

Assistive technology is not restrict-ed to special education. A consultant well versed on the emerging technolo-gies available to schools can provide RTI teams with more strategies and assistance for struggling students.

ConclusionBefore IDEA was reauthorized in 2004, many students who faced extreme academic diffi culty may not

have qualifi ed for special education services. Not only does RTI have potential to help those students, but also IDEA 2004 requires the use of RTI procedures. The new requirements will further intertwine general educa-tion and special education practices. All stakeholders should be mindful of this as they explore strategies to better meet the needs of all secondary students. PL

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

n Individuals with Disabilities Educa-tion Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.

n McCook, J. (2005, December 5). RTI implementation strategies and solutions[Virtual seminar]. Available from jmccook125@aol.com

n National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (2006). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.

n Walton, R. (2006, August 11). National Institute: Few teachers have assistive tech-nology plan. Retrieved from www.special edconnection.com/LrpSecStoryTool/servlet/GetStory?docid=3278790

n Walton, R. (2006, July 27). Summer training tips for fi ve tricky IDEA mandates. Retrieved from www.specialedconnection.com/LRPSecStoryTool/servlet/GetStory?docid=3263043

n Zirkel, P. (2006). The legal meaning of specifi c learning disability for special educa-tion disability. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Kelly arnberger (karnberger@usd273.org) is the principal at Beloit (KS) Junior-Senior High School.

robert Shoop (rshoop@ksu.edu) is a professor of education law at Kansas State University and co-author of a Principal’s Quick reference to School Law (Corwin, 2006).

why it worksn The strategies and tools are

systematic.

n The process is data driven.

n It is based on scientifi c research and evidence-based solutions.

n It demands problem solving and collaboration.

n It creates solutions to identifi ed problems.problems.problems.problems.problems.problems.

Are you interested in improving the performance of your school and increasing your students’ achievement levels?

NASSP’s Breaking Ranks School Reform Training can provide you with new strategies and tools for improving instruction, identifying staff development needs, and developing resources to create a positive school climate. Make plans now to attend and identify new entry points for continuing your school’s improvement efforts.

Registration Fee:Members: $575Nonmembers: $690Includes tuition, materials,and exclusive Web content.

Team Discounts:Only $475 per person with groups of 3 or moreAt least one registrant must be an NASSP member.

Continuing Education Units:Trainees will be awarded 2.2 CEUs.

Are you interested in improving the performance of your school and increasing your students’ achievement levels?

Breaking Ranks School Reform Training can provide you with new strategies and tools for Breaking Ranks School Reform Training can provide you with new strategies and tools for Breaking Ranks

BREAKING RANKS

Location: Washington Dulles Airport Marriott 45020 Aviation Drive, Dulles, VA 20166

Train-the-Trainer Workshops

Breaking Ranks II: Strategies for Leading High School ReformLearn how to implement this dynamic, research-based model that is loaded with practical strategies and methods to apply them.Dates: March 6–8, 2008 (Registration Deadline: February 5, 2008)

June 26–28, 2008 (Registration Deadline: May 23, 2008)

Breaking Ranks in the Middle: Strategies for Middle Level ReformAddresses a variety of issues that confront school leaders who are engaged in middle level school reform.Dates: January 17–19, 2008 (Registration Deadline: December 14, 2007)

April 10–12, 2008 (Registration Deadline: March 7, 2008)

for Middle Level Reform

Space is limited! Register today!www.principals.org/BRIItraining www.principals.org/BRIMtraining