School Based Leadership Team Year Two, Day Four

A collaborative project between the Florida Department of Education and the University of South Florida

School Based Leadership TeamYear Two, Day Four

SurveyPerception of RtI Skills

Your project ID is:

• Last 4 digits of SS#

• Last 2 digits of year of birth

Please complete this survey while you are settling in, prior to the beginning of our

session.

Advance Organizer

• Important PS/RtI Concepts for Continual Reinforcement

• Review of Project Data

• Review of PS/RtI Leadership Team Small Group Planning/Problem Solving

• SBLT Review of School Data

• SBLT Goal Setting and Planning for Next Year

Critical Concepts to Emphasize

Importance of a Solid Core

“Provide strong core curriculum, instruction, and assessment” - Florida Statewide RtI Plan (FSRtIP)

Research-based materials integrated into comprehensive core reading programs - K-12 Reading Plan (K12RP)

Use data to determine effectiveness of instructional strategies - School Improvement Plan (SIP)

Basic program results in “continuous and substantial academic improvement for all students” - NCLB


Importance of a Solid Core (cont.)

Schoolwide reform strategies that strengthen the core academic program in the school - NCLB

Evaluation of all students to determine whether schools achieved AYP - Florida’s NCLB Implementation

Must be evidence of “appropriate instruction” in reading and math prior to consideration of exceptional education - 6A-6.0331 (Gen. Ed. Intervention Rule)

Lack of academic progress must not be due to lack of appropriate instruction - 6A-6.03018 (SLD Rule)


Importance of Fidelity

Must have evidence that interventions are delivered with fidelity and level of implementation is documented- FSRtIP

90 minutes of “dedicated, uninterrupted” reading instruction- K12RP

Schools assembles team to monitor fidelity of RtI implementation - Diff. Acct. Guide (DAG)

“When provided with well-delivered scientific, research-based general education instruction and interventions of reasonable intensity and duration with evidence of implementation fidelity…” 6A-6.03018 (SLD Rule)


The Four Problem Solving Steps

Problem-solving method is used to make decisions based upon continuum of student need - FSRtIP

When students do not meet specific levels of performance, the nature of difficulty must be determined along with appropriate instruction/intervention - K12RP, Student Progression Plan

Interventions developed through process using student data to: identify, analyze, select & implement intervention, monitor response to intervention - 6A6.0331 (Gen. Ed. Intervention Rule)


The Four Problem Solving Steps (cont.)

Must be discussion with parents of: response to intervention, data used, adjustments to interventions, and anticipated future actions - 6A-6.0331 (Gen Ed Intervention Rule)

Repeated measures of academic progress, graphically represented, reflecting response to intervention provided to parents - 6A-6.03018 (SLD Rule)


The Importance of Comprehensive Intervention Planning

Intervention must be evidence-based & defined accurately, target skills identified, fidelity of implementation documented - FSRtIP

Describe how research-based instructional materials are integrated into core, supplemental, and intervention programs - K12RP

Must be discussion with parents of: response to intervention, data used, adjustments to interventions, and anticipated future actions - 6A-6.0331 (Gen Ed Intervention Rule)


PS/RtI = ALL STUDENTS




There is no “RtI Process” that is initiated for struggling students. Every student in

every tier is impacted in a PS/RtI system.

in order to meet benchmarks.

=

These students get these tiersof support

+


The goal of the tiers is student success, not labeling.

Beliefs Survey

Your project ID is:

• Last 4 digits of SS#

• Last 2 digits of year of birth

Project Data

SAPSI

Critical Components Checklist

Observation of PS Meetings

Florida PS/RtI Project: All Pilot Schools SBLT Fall 2007 to Winter 2008 Comparison

Self-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI)

0

1

2

3

Clearly defined

Tier 1 acadinstruction

Clearly defined

Tier 1 BehInstruction

Clearly definedTier 2 acad supp

instruction

Clearly definedTier 2 Beh Supp

Instruction

Evidence-based

Tier 3 AcadStrategies

Evidence-based

Tier 3 BehStrategies

21a 21b 21c 21d 21e 21f

Item

Status

3= Maintaining2= Achieved1= In Progress0= Not Started


Florida PS/RtI Project: All Pilot Schools SBLT Fall 2007 to Winter 2008 ComparisonSelf-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI)

Implementation- Problem-Solving Process

0

1

2

3

Define problem as data-based discrepancy

SBLT defines replacement beh

SBLT conducts problem analysis with dataEvidence-based strategies for interventions

Support identified for interventionsIntervention integrity is documentedRtI evaluated through data collection

Intervention changed based on student RtI

Parents involved in interventions

Monitoring plan exists

SBLT meets at least 2x per year

SBLT meets with District Team 2x per year

Plan changed based on data

Feedback of PS/RtI project provided to school

22a 22b 22c 22d 22e 22f 22g 22h 22i 23 24 25 26 27

Fall 07

Spr 08

Win 09

3= Maintaining2= Achieved1= In Progress0= Not Started


Florida PS/RtI Project: All Pilots Schools Critical Components Checklist for Tiers 1 and 2

0

1

2

Data to determineeffectiveness of core

(Academic or Behavior)Decisions made to modify

core or develop Tier II

interventions

Universal screening or

other data used to identify

groups in need of

intervention

Team hypotheses toidentify reasons for not

making benchmark

Data used to determinehypotheses for not making

benchmark

Modifications made to core

instruction - Plan

documented


instruction - Support

documented


instruction -

Implementationdocumented

Supp. instruction

developed or modified-

Plan documentedSupp. instruction

developed or modified-Support documented

Supp. instruction

developed or modified-Implementation doc.

Criteria for positive RtI

were defined

Progress monitoring data

scheduled/collected

Decision regarding student

RtI was documented

Plan for contin, modifying,or terminating interventions

provided

1 2 3 4 5 6a 6b 6c 7a 7b 7c 8 9 10 11

Item

Status

2007-08:BOY

2008-09:BOY

2= Present1= Partially Present0= Absent


0

1

2




interventions

Universal screening or otherdata used to identify groups

in need of intervention

Team hypotheses to identify

reasons for not making

benchmark


benchmark


instruction - Plan

documented



documented

Modifications made to coreinstruction - Implementation

documented

Supp. instruction developed

or modified- Plan

documented


or modified- Support

documented

Supp. instruction developedor modified- Implementation

doc.

Criteria for positive RtI were

defined


scheduled/collected


RtI was documented

Plan for contin, modifying, or

terminating interventions

provided

1 2 3 4 5 6a 6b 6c 7a 7b 7c 8 9 10 11Item

Status

2007-08: BOY

2008-09: BOY

2= Present1= Partially Present0= Absent


0

1

2




interventions

Universal screening or otherdata used to identify groups

in need of intervention

Team hypotheses to identify

reasons for not making

benchmark


benchmark


instruction - Plan

documented



documented

Modifications made to coreinstruction - Implementation

documented


or modified- Plan

documented


or modified- Support

documented

Supp. instruction developedor modified- Implementation

doc.

Criteria for positive RtI were

defined


scheduled/collected


RtI was documented

Plan for contin, modifying, or

terminating interventions

provided

1 2 3 4 5 6a 6b 6c 7a 7b 7c 8 9 10 11Item

Status

2007-08: BOY

2008-09: BOY

Project DataTiers I & II Observation Checklist

Project Level Graph

50%

64%

43%34%

44%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Roles Represented Problem Identification Problem Analysis InterventionDevelopment/Support

ProgramEvaluation/Resonse to

Intervention

Roles Present and Problem-Solving Steps

Percentage of Roles/Components

PercentPresent

Project DataInitial Problem-Solving Team Meeting Checklists

Project Level Graph

61%

77%72%

67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Roles Represented Problem Identification Problem Analysis InterventionDevelopment/Support


Percentage of Roles/Components Present

Percent Present %

Project DataFollow -Up Problem-Solving Team Checklist

Project Level Graph

65% 68%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Roles Represented Program Evaluation/Responseto Intervention


Percentage of Roles/Components Present

Percent Present

Small Group Planning & Problem Solving

Small Group Planning and Problem Solving

Priority Selected: Development of School Based PS/RtI Implementation Plans at all Pilot Schools

1. Desired Outcome and How it will be Measured: All pilot schools will have PS/RtI Implementation Plans by December 2009, evidenced by data from the SAPSI item 23.


2. Brainstorm all available resources/positive factors that might facilitate achievement of desired outcome and all obstacles that might prevent achieving the desired outcome:

Resources (+) Obstacles (-)

PD infrastructure is establishedCoaches are available for follow-upNASDSE School Level Blueprint is available as a resource (not a checklist or flowchart)Project Data are availableSchool access to Regional CoordinatorsTitle II FundsPS/RtI is being integrated into existing plans (SIP, K-12 Reading, Student Progression)Creative Scheduling

Time for planning, coachingSBLT meeting to review student data, but not implementation dataSBLT may not know that implementation data are availableLimited communication between DLT and SBLTSBLT may perceive that District PS/RtI Plan must be complete prior to development of school planSupport and expectation to develop School Based PS/RtI plans has not been explicit from projectDistrict policies/procedures may conflict with PS/RtISchool administrators unclear as to District directionsThere is a need for District plans to evaluate extent to which schools are implementing PS/RtI


3. Select one (1) obstacle from #2 to address first and identify it in behaviorally descriptive terms – ensure everyone understands it.

Support and expectation to develop School Based PS/RtI plans has not been explicit from project


4. Brainstorm strategies to reduce or eliminate only the obstacle identified in #3 and record them below. These are only ideas. Do not consider feasibility or implementation at this stage.

Use Y2D4 Training to provide structure and support for goal setting.

Provide time for planning during Y2D4 training

Consult with principals, coaches, and project liaisons to learn the barriers faced and support needed to develop a School Based PS/RtI Implementation Plan

Build support into Year 3 PD plan

Provide examples of plans


5. Using the list generated in #4 as a stimulus, but not as a limit to ideas, develop multiple action plans to reduce or eliminate only the obstacle identified in #3. Specify who will do what (descriptively) and by when. DETAIL IS A MUST!!!!!

6. Specify a plan for follow-up for each action plan. (How will completion be verified and outcome evaluated)


#1 Who: Beth, Kelly, Brian, Jose, Clark

What action: Team will design Day 4 training to focus on implementation data review and goal setting.Jose – Produce: Perceptions of RtI Skills, Beliefs Survey, School Data Handouts, Small Group Planning Handouts, Training Evaluation

Beth, Kelly – Research NCLB, Florida’s operationalization of NCLB, for bullets contributing to Important Concepts slides

Brian – Research State RtI Plan, K-12 Reading, Pupil Progression, DA for bullets contributing to Important Concepts slides, develop guiding questions for School Data review

Clark – create slides for Important Concepts, PS/RtI = all students, students + triangle = all green, Timeline, Review GenEd/SLD rules for bullets contributing to Important Concept slides

Clark will compile input from team members by 3/26/09.

When: 3/18/09

Plan for Follow-Up: Clark will arrange for conference call 3/20/09Clark will make check-in calls to team members 3/25/09


#2 Who: Beth, Kelly, Brian

What action: Regional Coordinators will deliver Y2D4

When:4/7/09 Walton4/9/09 Polk4/13/09 Pasco East4/14/09 Pinellas A4/16/09 Monroe South4/17/09 Monroe North4/21/09 Pinellas B4/22/09 Clay4/23/09 Pasco West5/4/09 St. Johns

Plan for Follow-Up: Clark will email Beth, Kelly, Brian two days prior to each training meeting to assure that each has materials and support necessary for meeting.


7. Plan for evaluation of reduction or elimination of obstacle identified in #3:

Review permanent products:

Y2D4 ppt

Training evaluations

Action plans created during Y2D4 Small Group Planning time

8. Plan for evaluating progress toward achievement of desired outcome specified in #1

Review SAPSI Item 23 from administration EOY 08/09 and MOY 09/10

Receive coach input ongoing and at beginning of 09/10 coach meeting

Review school progress toward development of School Based PS/RtI Plan at beginning of 09/10 coach meeting.

Goal Setting & Planning

1. Review of School Data• School Data• Guiding Questions

2. Small Group Planning & Problem Solving• Small Group Planning Handout

3. Collect Plans• If plans not complete by end of day, Coaches will send

completed plans to RCs

Training Evaluation

No project ID necessary

Documents

School Based Leadership Team Year Two, Day Four