Using Benchmark Data to Determine Instructional/Intervention Needs at

All Levels

Eleanora Hilton-Taylor

Andrea Seibel

RTI Framework: A Continuum of Support

• Tier 1: Core Universal Instruction and Supports- General academic and behavior instruction and support designed and differentiated for all students in all settings

– Differentiated Instruction: The process of ensuring that what a student is taught, how he/she is taught it, and how the student demonstrates what he/she has learned is matched to specific student needs

• Tier 2: Targeted Supplemental Interventions and Supports- More focused, targeted instruction/intervention and supplemental support in addition to and aligned with the core academic and behavior curriculum and instruction

• Tier 3: Intensive Individualized Interventions and Supports- The most intense (increased time, narrowed focus, reduced group size) instruction and intervention based upon individual student need provided in addition to and aligned with core and supplemental academic and behavior, curriculum, instruction, and supports

Problem Solving in RTI

The application of the problem solving process across the three tiers of support is an essential component of RTI.

• If less than approximately 80% of students are successful given core, universal instruction, engage in Tier 1 level problem solving

• If more than approximately 15% of students are receiving support at the targeted, supplemental level, engage in Tier 1 level problem solving

• If more than approximately 5% of students are receiving support at the intensive, individualized level, engage in Tier 1 and Tier 2 level problem solving

For Example:

• If the 3rd grade core package of services delivered in reading results in only 50% of the students meeting grade-level benchmarks, the five problem solving steps are implemented with a focus on Tier 1 so that the team may 1) define the problem, 2) identify the discrepancy between what the students are able to do and what we want them to do, 3) use data to develop a plan, 4) combine resources and efforts to implement the plan, and 5) measure student response to the adjusted instruction. The same process is applied at subsequent tiers if the measured level of effectiveness of the services provided at that tier does not meet expectation.

Looking at Last Year’s End of Year Data or Beginning of the Year Data:

What percentage of students are in each tier based on benchmarking data?

• By grade level

• By classroom

What does this data tell us?

• Which level should we begin problem solving at?

• What is our starting point for matching interventions to need?

Example 1:

• Grade level has met targeted percentage of students in all three tiers.

Example 2:

• Grade level has not met targeted percentage of students in all three tiers.

Tier 3: Four students with points evenly spread between Dibels, SBRC, and Teacher Perception Tier 2: Ten students total. Two students received 4 points from SBRC. The rest received 2 points from SBRC. Seven students received 5 or more points from Dibels. The three students receiving less than 5 points from Dibels all received 4 points from teacher perception and 2 points from SBRC. Tier 3: 4/66= 6% Tier 2: 10/66= 15% Tier 1: 52/66= 79%

What initial hypotheses can we make?

1) The four students in Tier 3 struggle with more than one part of Reading. They are being flagged by a Curriculum Based Measurement (ORF), Summative Grade-Level Assessment (EOY-SBRC), and by their classroom teacher. Specific data will need to be looked at to determine appropriate intervention.

2) The two students in Tier 2 who received 4 points from the SBRC received 5 points from Dibels and 4 points from Teacher Perception. They also appear to struggle with more than one part of Reading. They may fit into interventions with the Tier 3 students if their needs match. Specific data will need to be looked at to determine appropriate intervention.

3) Of the seven students who received 5+ points from Dibels, five of them received 2 points from SBRC. These five students appear to struggle most in the area(s) of phonics/fluency (ORF should be looked at to determine which. If accuracy is below 95%, phonics should most likely be addressed before fluency). Unless information showing otherwise is available, small-group phonics or fluency intervention would be a good starting point.

4) Additional data should be looked at for the three students receiving less than 5 points from Dibels, 4 points from teacher perception, and 2 points from SBRC. These students would not be in Tier 2 if they did not receive the highest points possible from teacher perception. Is there other evidence of struggles with phonics/fluency? Are classroom behaviors/learning-readiness skills impacting academic performance (performance deficit vs. skill deficit)?

Tier 3: Ten students with points spread between Dibels, SBRC, and teacher perception. Tier 2: Fourteen students with points split mostly between SBRC and Dibels. All but two of these students received 2 points from Teacher perception (one-4 one-0).

Tier 3: 10/70= 14% Tier 2: 14/70= 20% Tier 1: 46/70= 66% Where should problem solving start? • Tier 1? • Tier 2? • Tier 3?

What other questions could be asked? • How did individual classroom

data look? • What supports were in place? • Is there data on fidelity to

core/interventions? • What needs to be done to

address the needs of these students?

• We cannot hypothesize as much about individual and small group student needs, based on this data alone, because a specific area of need does not stand out for many of the students in Tier 2 or Tier 3.

• Should we be looking at

individual student interventions at this point?

• Would it be realistic to

provide intensive interventions to 10 students in this grade of 70 students as well as supplemental instruction to 14 additional students?

Tier-specific Questions

• Guides that include important questions for teams to address in order to guide discussions about the effectiveness of instruction at each tier.

• The effectiveness of each tier of instruction must be monitored to ensure the strength of the entire system.

Start Thinking…

• How will we know if what we are doing is working? (Progress Monitoring)

• If we don’t see positive changes based on our problem solving efforts, what can we do? – Was the instruction/intervention implemented

with fidelity? The purpose of monitoring implementation fidelity is not to evaluate the teacher’s performance. Rather, it is to ensure that the team is making decisions based on what is actually provided to the student.

What does your data tell you?

Last year’s EOY Data/Current BOY Data: • Whole School • Grade Level • Classroom Current class rosters using EOY: • Where should PLC discussions begin?

– Grade Level needs – Classroom needs – Small Group Intervention – Individual Intervention

Data

• Take a look at last year’s data

• What does it tell you?

Practical Wisdom

There are two ways to improve

results: redesign the school based

on best instructional practices or

get new kids.

- Tim Westerberg, former high school principal in Littleton, CO

How do we adjudicate “best”? A requirement

without which coherent focus is impossible !

True-isms for Improving

OUR Schools

It is impossible to improve student

achievement unless we improve

our teaching...

How well we teach = how well they learn - email stamp, Dr. Anita Archer

Extending the Reach of Tier 1: Ensuring the Literate Engagement of

EVERY Student, EVERY day –

EVERY Lesson!

Dr. Kevin Feldman

kfeldman@scoe.org www.scoe.org

Meet my son, Max

No problem engaging Max

in Jazz Band...

But in the classroom, Max, like many

students, looks for the ZME...

Z – Zone of...

M – Minimal

E – Effort !!

WE taught him

that “chilling” is

OK – acceptable...

It’s our responsibility

to change the “game”!

Road Map: Improving Literacy/

Achievement School-wide 1) Compelling Need – sense of urgency, the status quo

is not adequate – focus on the students not the adults

2) Shared Vision/understanding of Evidence Based Instruction

- guided by a “Shared Epistemology” – Evidence Based Practices

- open system, EVERYONE has access to the data/research

3) Thoughtful, Relentless FOCUS on Improving Instruction/Curriculum

in ALL Classrooms – bring the vision to life, walking the talk via

creating Culture of Feedback (video/learning walks/pairs, etc)

4) Data based decision making – classroom level evidence (e.g. LW/ Video /CFAs/) - on going feedback, reflection, inquiry into improvement

5) Relationships built on mutual trust and respect - commitment

not compliance – ”flesh and blood test”

Rationale: Why Change?? How could you help signal the compelling need for

change – improvement – enhanced teaching...

without getting stuck in the “blame/excuse/OK is

good enough... game”?

√ Local test data trends over the past 2-3 yrs

√ Subgroups rate of progress or lack thereof

√ Common Core State Standards (1 in 3 students

are “college/career” OR ready according to NAEP)

√ Informal data (grades, drop out in HS, D/F lists, credit

counts, culminating projects, etc.)

√ Student perceptions - interviews/surveys

√ Parent perceptions – interviews/surveys, ETC.

Literacy: It’s EVERYONE’S

Responsibility

√ reading, writing AND speaking, listening (THINKING)

√ across the grades, content area disciplines

√ each discipline has a unique lexicon students must master

ENGAGEMENT, at its core, is the

observable evidence of a learner’s interest and

active involvement in all lesson content and

related tasks, with clearly articulated “evidence

checks” of concrete, productive responses to

instruction.

A Working Definition:

Engagement is not optional – it’s how we

play the “game” of schooling/learning.

In other words it is.....

“Visible Evidence” R in RTI

20/80 Dilemma Decades of research clearly demonstrates

approximately 20% students are responsible

for 80% of the “doing (answering, asking, volunteering etc)...

We Must “flip” this equation... shooting for 100%,

and routinely producing at least 80%...

What percentage of students

actively participate in typical

classroom discussions ??

Academic Engagement at its Core

is the Quantity & Quality of Student:

Saying - Oral Language

Writing- Written Language

Doing - pointing, touching,

demonstrating, etc.

** NEVER more than 2-10 Rule **

Motto of the Highly Engaged

Classroom...

If it’s worth doing,

then I am going to ensure

that ALL students are

“doing the doing”...

How Well We Structure =

How Engaged They Are

An Engagement Bottom Line:

Engagement is NOT about this or

that Strategy....

e.g. Think – pair – share, Tell – help – check

Do – check – teach, Give one - Get One,

Numbered Heads Together, Reciprocal Teaching

Concept attainment, Cooperative, Questioning

the Author, Jigsaw, etc etc...

It is about the architecture, the tools, teacher clarity

re: what kind of “saying/writing/doing” will I structure

into EVERY strategy I choose to use, thus ensuring

every student is making their thinking visible and

receiving actionable feedback on what they thought.

Breaking Old Habits That Don’t Work!

Common Instructional

Practices “old school”

That Don’t work...

Architecture of Effective

Practices to Ensure

ALL are Engaged

√ T asks questions & S

raise hands to answer

√ T asks “does anyone know?”

√ T asks “who can tell me ?”

√ Who would like to share?

√ Who has an idea? Etc...

Everyone, stop and think,

list/write, partners rehearse

(1s – 2s structure the talk),

then “strategic call” (looks

random, but it’s purposeful)

all are ready/able to

participate – scaffold as

necessary to ensure ALL

means ALL !

Structured Engagement “tool kit”: Ensure ALL Are Responding

4) Individual Responses (AFTER rehearsal/practice) - random/strategic call on individuals (NO hands up) - use complete sentences, use new vocabulary/AL

1) Choral Responses - do “it” together (verbal or physical) - teacher cues students to respond (e.g. hand signal, voice, eyes)

- physical responses too; fingers under the word, chart,etc. - “thumbs up when you know”/fist of five (metacognition)

2) “Precision” Partner & Small Group (IF task warrants) Responses - teacher assigns - provide a label/role “1’s tell 2’s” - alternate ranking (high with middle, middle with lower) - thoughtful questions/prompts/up & down Bloom’s taxonomy

3) Written Responses: Brief non-fiction writing - focused prompts increase thinking, accountability, focus - structure academic language (e.g. sentence starters) - e.g. power sentences, 5 min. papers (summarize, defend)

Essential Questions:

1) What is engagement to you?

What does it look like/sound like?

2) What can educators do

to enhance/improve/foster/

& otherwise cause students

to become more engaged?

Engagement is NOT a Function of How

INTENSE the Teacher is!!

Or if your triple latte has kicked in!

And it’s NOT dependent upon how

DRAMATIC the teacher happens to be…

Robin Williams in The Dead Poet’s Society

I do it - modeling (including thinking aloud)

We do it - teacher guided

Y’all do it - partner practice/small

group IF task/topic warrants

You do it - independent practice (w/feedback)

It IS Explicit Teaching to

Ensure Visible Learning !

heart & soul

of effective

instruction...

- Anita Archer

An Example of a Evidence Based “Shared

Lens” to Focus on Improved Teaching

1) Engagement: Everyone Does Everything

2) Language: Academic Language/Vocabulary

Explicitly Taught/Applied

3) Thinking: Critical Thinking Explicitly Taught/

Applied

* Of course, plus each teacher’s essential content area info!

4) Scaffolding: Temporary support necessary so

ALL types of students are learning

Precision Partnering:

Teaching the 4Ls “Precision Partnering” Structures for Success

Determine/Assign who will be partner #1 and #2

no #3s (second #2 will share after first #2).

Teach the “4 Ls” for working with a partner:

Look - Make eye contact.

Lean - Lean toward your partner.

Listen - Demonstrate active listening/responding/

“accountable talk” (building on partner’s idea,

agree/disagree & why, etc.)

Low Voice - Use your private or Library voice.

Engagement “take aways” :

Making Sure it Happens

① Own it – it’s our responsibility

② Teach it - the “game” of school – day #1

③ Model the “engagement tool kit”

④ Monitor your messages –”Everyone____”

⑤ Post reminders (like the seat belt beeper)

⑥ Give/Get Feedback – “walk the talk”,

observe colleagues, video your classes,

collect student response data, refine ...

Providing Effective Feedback

as An Instructional Colleague

1) Respect – respect – respect : Think Aretha !!

** Should is banned! No “shoulding” on anyone!

2) Specific – actionable – detailed – unambiguous...

“it appeared effective when you _____”

3) Begin with affirmations – build on what is

positive/productive – what’s working and why?

4) Frame suggestions as actions to be checked out:

“In my experience it is even more effective to____

give this a go and see how your students respond...”

5) Tie the feedback directly to our shared “lens” –

how is the teaching structuring or causing student

engagement/academic language/critical thinking, etc.

Learning the Language of Respectful –

Actionable Feedback (it’s not necessarily natural!)

“Sentence frames” for teachers/coaches/admin.

It appeared effective when you _____

I appreciated how you _______

I thought it was really (your fav positive adj.) when you

______ because this caused the students to _______

The students were _____ when you_____

I noticed the students were _____, I wonder what would

happen if you ________?

I’ve found it works great to ______, give that a go

and see what you find.

Where are you going next in this lesson?

I wonder how you might have _______?

Guided video critique using a “shared lens” on instruction is a

great/safe place to begin leaning to give/receive meaningful

“actionable feedback” – a key to improving instruction.

1) Anita Archer: http://explicitinstruction.org/

2) Doug Fisher/Nancy Frey:

http://www.youtube.com/user/FisherandFrey

3) Sonoma County Office of Education:

http://www.scoe.org/reading

4) Kevin Feldman: kfeldman@scoe.org

5) Catherine Snow – Word Generation: http://wg.serpmedia.org/

Sample Sources for FREE Instructional Videos

to Develop Our Analysis/Feedback Skills

Next Steps

Based on your data…

How will you move forward from here?