RTI and Special
Education:
Putting It All
Together
Gerald Herbert/AP
Sponsored by:
View all upcoming webinars: www.edweek.org/go/webinar
Webinar Moderator:
Anthony Rebora
Managing editor, Education Week Teacher and the
Teacher Professional Development Sourcebook.
View the latest issue of the Teacher Professional Development
Sourcebook focusing exclusively on RTI. Stories, interviews, and
resources @ www.edweek.org/tsb/
Our Guests
Amanda VanDerHeyden
Education consultant and researcher, and a member of the
advisory council for the National Center for Learning Disabilities’
RTI Action Network.
Evelyn Johnson
Associate Professor of Special Education at Boise State University,
specializing in accountability, RTI, and identification of students
with learning disabilities.
Kristen McMaster
Associate Professor of Special Education in the Department of
Educational Psychology at the University of Minnesota,
specializing in RTI for at-risk students and data-based
instructional decisionmaking.
Spotlight on RTI
Response to Intervention relies on early
evaluation of students’ learning needs
to modify the instruction they receive.
This Spotlight takes a closer look at the
increasingly popular practice.
Buy now!
www.edweek.org/go/spotlights/RTI
Follow today’s conversation on Twitter.
Use the #edweekRTI hashtag to converse,
share resources, tips, and URLs with our live
audience.
Follow Education Week @ twitter.com/educationweek
Ensuring the Adequacy of RtI for
Valid Decision Making
Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them
Amanda M. VanDerHeyden, Ph.D.
Researcher & Consultant
amandavande@gmail.com
The Promise of RtI-Accountability, Efficiency, Social Justice
 Identify those who need help and provide help rapidly
(early intervention)
 Reduce unnecessary evaluations
 Raise achievement for all and for vulnerable students
 Protect against misdiagnosis of Learning Disability
 Improve equity by ethnicity, gender, poverty, language
 No initiative solves all problems; However, RTI is an opportunity to
prioritize what is most important: allocate resources more efficiently
to improve learning outcomes for all students including students who
are most vulnerable.
LD is a Rule-Out Decision
 The conundrum
 Must rule out alternative causes of poor academic
performance
Rule-Out Inadequate Instruction
90
80
70
60
50
40
Proceed to Tier 2
30
20
4/17/03
4/16/03
4/15/03
10
0
4/14/03
D igits C o rr ect T w o M inutes
Teac her A D ivis ion 0-9
Maximize Probability for “Best”
Performance
Tier 3
In terven tion P ro gres s
D C 2M
Baseline
Intervention
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Novel, grade-level probe
1
2
3
4
5
W e ek
Back to the Promise of RtI-- It’s
All About the Intervention
P e rce n t o f M in o rity a n d C au cas ian
S tu d e n ts in R is k C ate g o ry
What Proportion of Ethnicity Represented
Before and After Intervention in Risk
Category?
100
90
80
70
60
Minority
50
Caucasian
40
30
20
10
0
B efore
Intervention
A fter Intervention
E xpected
VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005
© Amanda VanDerHey den, Do Not Reproduce without Written Permission
Take-Home Points
 Effects will only be as good as
implementation
 Respond to Red Flags
 High rates of intervention failure, high
numbers of students at Tiers 2 and 3 are
signs of Error.
Signs of Error
VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials of RtI. Wiley.
Signs of Error
VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials of RtI. Wiley.
Signs of Error
VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials of RtI. Wiley.
Signs of Error
VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials of RtI. Wiley.
Signs of Error
VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials of RtI. Wiley.
VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials of RtI. Wiley.
Signs of Error
VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials of RtI. Wiley.
Signs of Error
VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials of RtI. Wiley.
For More Information
 amandavande@gmail.com
 VanDerHeyden & Burns (2010). Essentials
of Response to Intervention. Wiley.
 www.isteep.com
 www.rtinetwork.org (RTI Action Network)
 www. naspweb.org
 www.interventioncentral.org
for attending the Education Week
Webinar, RTI and Special Education:
Putting It All Together, sponsored by
the Learning Management System
from SunGard Public Sector, K-12.
The products that make up our Learning Management System...
….allow K-12 educators to make data-driven decisions by managing
curriculum standards, curriculum mapping and benchmark assessments.
“PerformancePLUS has made knowing your students
easier… it’s changed the face of teacher preparation.”
-Kelly Murphy
Instructional Technology
Gettysburg School District, PA
Visit: sungardps.com
Email: getinfo@sungardps.com.
Call: 866.965.7732
RTI and SLD Determination
Evelyn Johnson, Ed.D.
Boise State University
May 13, 2010
RTI as School Improvement
Continuous
School
Improvement
Data-based
Decision
Making
Tier 3
Tier 2
Professional
Learning
Communities
Assess
ment
General
Education
Instruction
SLD Definition
A specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of the
basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using
language, spoken or written, which may manifest itself in an imperfect
ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical
calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain
injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.
Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that are
primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental
retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or
economic disadvantage. (34 CFR Sec. 300.8 (c)(10))
Why is it so hard to diagnose?
Measurement
Problem
Values
Problem
SLD
Problem
Definition
Problem
Resource
Problem
Definition Criteria
1. Disorder in
psychological
process
2. Imperfect ability to
learn
3. Does not include
problems due to
other causes
Method
1. Cognitive Processing 1. Assessment of
Deficit
process related to
2. Progress Monitoring
academic area of
& Achievement Data
deficit
3. Observation, data to 2. RTI & Achievement
confirm appropriate
tests
instruction,
3. Observation, RTI,
exclusionary criteria
consideration of
other factors
How RTI informs the Eligibility
Process
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 1
Ensure a Solid Tier One Program
Tier 1 consists of: A core instructional program
Benchmarking 3 x’s per year
Professional Development
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 1
Provide Intervention
Tier 2 consists of: Evidence based, small group, targeted intervention
(Standard Protocol) Progress Monitoring
2nd Marker – Lack of Progress
RTI
What it tells us
Rules out ‘instructional
disability’
Provides early intervening
support for students
previously not eligible for
other services
Tells us the student does not
respond to generally effective
instruction & intervention
But we still need to know
Why doesn’t this student
respond?
What individualized
instruction should we try now?
Measures of Achievement
What we have so far
Performance data on local
measures
Performance data relative to
peers
What we still need
Performance data on
standardized measures with
national norms
Performance specific to the
areas of SLD
Psychological Processes
Assist in Identification
Phonological Processing
Working Memory
Assist in Intervention Planning
Numerous research based
interventions target
phonological processing
deficits, especially for young
children
Students with memory issues
need structure, repetition,
summarization strategies
Exclusionary Criteria
Rule out:
– visual, hearing, or motor disabilities,
– Cognitive impairment,
– Emotional disturbance,
– Environmental, cultural, or economic
disadvantage
Exclusionary Criteria
RTI helps us here too!
– Environmental, cultural, or economic
disadvantage – through the use of an RTI process
(as described previously) we collect data that
although a student has been provided with
appropriate instructional experiences, they have
not responded
THANKS!
evelynjohnson@boisestate.edu
RTI and Special Education:
Using Data to Set IEP Goals and
Provide Individualized Instruction
Kristen L. McMaster
May 13, 2010
Presentation Overview
• Special Education Within RTI
• Critical Features of Special Education
Intervention
• Using Data to Set IEP Goals and Monitor
Response to Intervention
• Other Important Considerations
Special Education Within RTI
• Special education is the most intensive RTI
“tier” (in some models, Tier 3 = special
education)
• Students are identified based on:
– Progress monitoring data from RTI
interventions (e.g., Tiers 1 and 2) AND
– Comprehensive evaluation by a multidisciplinary team
How does Special Education Intervention
Compare to Tier 2 Intervention?
Tier 2/General Ed
Tier 3/Special Ed
Instructional
grouping
Small groups (e.g., 3-5
students)
Individual or small groups
(ideally, 3 students or less)
Type of intervention
Evidence-based, often a
Highly individualized,
“standard treatment protocol” determined through
problem solving
Intensity
Supplement to Tier 1; often
30-45 min per day
May supplement or
supplant Tier 1; increased
frequency and/or duration
Personnel
Could be classroom teacher,
paraprofessional, literacy
specialist, etc.)
Should be special educator
trained to work with
students with disabilities
Progress monitoring
Used to determine response
to Tier 2
Used to make ongoing
instructional changes
Critical Features of Special
Education Intervention within RTI
• Develop measurable annual IEP goals
• Plan instruction based on individual student
need
• Make instructional decisions using progress
monitoring data
Develop annual IEP goals.
• Establish present level of performance
(baseline):
– Use existing progress monitoring data OR
collect additional progress monitoring data
• Example:
– Given a writing prompt, Jamie writes 9 correct
word sequences in 3 minutes.
Develop annual IEP goals.
• Set a reasonable and ambitious goal:
– Use published growth rates
OR
– Use district or national benchmarks
• Example:
– Given a writing prompt, Jamie will write at
least 35 correct word sequences in 3 minutes
by the end of the school year.
Example: Setting a Goal
Correct Word Sequences
40
30
Baseline
20
10
0
Dates of Probes
Example: Setting a Goal
Correct Word Sequences
40
30
Baseline
20
10
0
Dates of Probes
Example: Setting a Goal
40
Correct Word Sequences
Annual Goal
30
Baseline
20
10
0
Dates of Probes
Plan instruction based on
individual student need.
• Determine individual student need based on
– Additional assessment data (e.g., error analysis, work samples)
– Observation of student performance
• Determine appropriate level of intensity, such as
–
–
–
–
–
Grouping format (e.g., 1:1, small group, peer mediated)
Frequency
Duration
Motivation/reinforcement
Explicitness of instruction (modeling, pacing, guided practice,
opportunities to respond, etc.)
Make instructional decisions
using progress monitoring data
• Collect ongoing progress monitoring data
– For example, weekly CBM probes
• Use decision rules to determine if/when an
instructional change is needed
– For example, 3 to 4 data points below the goal
line
• Change instruction as needed
Example: Data-Based Instructional Decisions
Correct Word Sequences
40
Intervention 1
(e.g., Direct Instruction)
30
Baseline
20
10
0
Dates of Probes
Annual Goal
Example: Data-Based Instructional Decisions
Correct Word Sequences
40
Annual Goal
Intervention 1
(e.g., Direct Instruction)
30
Baseline
20
Intervention 2
(e.g., Peer
Mediated
component)
10
0
Dates of Probes
Example: Data-Based Instructional Decisions
Correct Word Sequences
40
Annual Goal
Intervention 1
(e.g., Direct Instruction)
30
Baseline
20
Intervention 2
(e.g., Peer
Mediated
component)
10
0
Dates of Probes
Intervention 3
(e.g., Peer
Mediated
component
plus Self
Regulated
Strategy
Development)
Other Important Considerations
• Need for highly trained special educators
– Special educators must be strong problem
solvers who are knowledgeable about effective
intervention approaches.
• Flexible use of tiers within RTI
– When data indicate that student is performing
at or above expected level for his or her grade,
he or she may move to less intensive tier.
References & Resources
• Articles:
– Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The “blurring “ of special
education in a new continuum of general education placements and
services. Exceptional Children, 76, 301-324.
– Stecker, P. M. (2007). Tertiary intervention: Using progress monitoring
with intensive services. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39, 50-57.
• Websites:
–
–
–
–
Research Institute on Progress Monitoring www.progressmonitoring.org
National Center on Progress Monitoring www.studentprogress.org
Peabody IRIS Center http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/
National Center on RTI http://www.rti4success.org/
An on-demand archive of this
webinar is going to be
available at
www.edweek.org/go/webinar
in less than 24hrs.
Please visit often, and send this link to your friends.
Thanks for taking part today. We really appreciate it.
The Editors @ edweek.org