Overview of RtI Assessment
 Brief
history and review of RtI
 Description of Tiers
 Assessment Tools
 Instructional Materials to Use based
on Assessment Data
 Resources Available
IDEA 1997 v. IDEA 2004

IDEA 1997
– Student has SLD if:
Student failed to
achieve commensurate
with age and ability if
provided appropriate
teaching experiences
AND
- IEP team found SEVERE
DISCREPANCY between
achievement and
intellectual ability

IDEA 2004
– No longer required to
find severe discrepancy

IEP team may use a
process that
determines if the child
responds to a
SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCHED BASED
INTERVENTION
Problems with the Discrepancy
Model
Critics have described the model as a wait
to fail model. Students must be at least 2
years behind before receiving help.
 Easier to catch students up at an earlier
age but they would not qualify.
 By the time they qualify emotional
damage and self concept issues are harder
to get rid of.

Multi Tiered Model of Service
Delivery
 Tier
1 - Universal Interventions
 Tier
2 - Selected Interventions
 Tier
3 - Intensive Interventions
3 tiered model
Tier 3: Intensive, Individual
Interventions (5%)
•Individual Students
•Assessment-based
•High Intensity
•Of longer duration
Tier 2: Targeted Group
Interventions (15%)
•Some students (at-risk)
•High efficiency
•Rapid response
Tier 1: Universal
Interventions (80%)
•All students
•Preventive,
proactive
1-5%
1-5%
5-10%
80-90%
5-10%
Students
80-90%
RtI Decision-Making Guide
TIER I
 Universal screening: fall, spring,
winter
 Cut-off score = 25th percentile.
 Principal chairs a meeting with RtI
team. Data are analyzed to identify
trends in students falling below
cutoff score. Consultation with
teachers occurs regarding curriculum
and instructional practices.

Tier I (cont.)
Teachers implement core curriculum and
strategies for 6–8 weeks. Review
classroom data and analyze progress of
struggling learners with CBMs or
classroom-based assessments.
 * Decision point: Identify students who
continue to fall below cutoff score and
demonstrate a lack of progress, falling
within the bottom 10 percent of students
based on district norms. Schedule RtI
meeting to discuss their move to Tier 2.

TIER II


Strategic interventions: 9–12 weeks; repeat
Use researched fluency learning rates (Fuchs, Deno,
Shapiro, AIMSweb, etc.).
– Establish baseline scores and develop aimline (goal).
– Determine number of weeks of intervention, a 30minute session 2 or 3 days per week.
– Problem-solve intervention.
– Assign case manager, assessment support, and
intervention support.
– Begin intervention.
– Progress monitoring 2 times per week.
Tier II (cont.)


* Decision point: Weeks 4–6. Use a 3- or 4data-point decision rule to monitor progress, and
problem-solve if intervention needs to be altered.
– Continue intervention.
* Decision point: Weeks 9–12. Reconvene RtI
team, and analyze data. If learning rate improves
according to aimline, continue intervention. If
not, change intervention and monitor for a repeat
of weeks 9–12 ; or if learning rate continues to
fall significantly below that of peers (10th
percentile), refer student to Tier III.
TIER III
 Intensive
interventions
 Increase intensity of intervention to
two 30-minute sessions per day, 5
days a week, conducted by trained
support personnel. RtI team may
also add to standard protocol
interventions.
 Increase progress monitoring to 3
times per week.
Tier III (cont.)


Decision point: Weeks 9–12. If learning rate
increases, continue intervention. If learning rate
does not increase or if intensity of intervention is
judged to be long-term based upon resources,
refer student for a comprehensive evaluation.
* Decision point: IEP (individualized education
plan) team convenes to review comprehensive
evaluation and determine special education
eligibility. If student is deemed eligible, IEPs are
developed based on all data. Progress monitoring
continues. Student receives Tier 1 and Tier 3
interventions
Tier 1 Program
(Primary Prevention; General Education;
Universal core instructional program)
During the Tier I pull-out program, focus in on
the “BIG IDEAS” of reading instruction:
•Phonemic Awareness
•Alphabetical Principal
•Accuracy and fluency reading to connected text
•Vocabulary development
•Reading Comprehension
Tier II
 More
intense instruction
 Biweekly progress monitoring
 Small groups
 More individualized
Tier III
 Most
intensive instruction
 Weekly progress monitoring
 Programs are individualized and
adjusted as needed
 Usually preliminary to a referral
Referral
 Maintain
tracking sheets when
students switch levels
 Put tracking sheets in reg ed cum
 Can now use tracking sheets to
establish interventions
 No longer need a discrepancy
School Psych Report
 Answers
the following questions:
– Does xxx qualify for special education
based on the criteria set forth under
Federal RtI guidelines?
 Data
must be collected to establish a
pattern.
Examples of High School
Assessment Tools
 Ideas
for assessment
– Group Reading Assessment and
Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE)
– Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests
Revised
– Research going on using Strategies
Intervention Model
Example of Middle School
Assessment Tools
Use CST and CELDT as screening tools
 Students are placed into reading
strategies classes and further testing is
continued
 San Diego quick is used to measure word
in isolation decoding
 Scholastics 3-minute fluency is used to
measure oral reading fluency

 Reading
Specialist does most of the
individual assessments
 Performs these assessments during
lunch, prep period and class time.
 District used to hire a substitute to
help in order to finish assessments,
now uses PEP/Tutorial time
Example of Elementary School
Assessment Tools
 Dibels
 Pseudoword
 AR-
Decoding (GL WIAT)
STAR
 Color coded tracking sheet for ease
of selection
 Learn to trust data!!!
 Check with reg ed teachers
Examples of Interventions at
Elementary Level
 Rewards
 6-Minute
Solution (ORF)
 Read Naturally
 Pilot Site for Reading Plus (on
computer)
Who Gets Assessed?





Students scoring as Basic (below 325 CST)
Below Basic and Far Below Basic.
Teacher or Parent Concerns can trigger an
assessment.
Students scoring below a 2.0 GPA.
Students placed in an intervention class
receive additional testing.
Students scoring on grade level are then
moved out of intervention class.
Logistics



Students grouped by grade level or ELD label
but not on data
Students stay for a year, can be moved at
semester
Interventions for 7th and 8th graders delivered
in a double block period combining the
intervention with the core Language Arts
Instruction
Tier I



Assessment
– CELDT
– AR STAR
– Read Naturally
– Rewards
Delivery
– Gen Ed classroom/ small group instruction
Monitor
– DIBLES monthly, AR STAR monthly, Unit Assessments
Tier II



Assessment
– Quick phonics screener
– Phonics for Reading
– Rewards
– Literature Connection/complete
Delivery
– 4 days a week 30 min time blocks
Monitor
– Tier 2+ weekly DIBLES, Biweekly program progress
– Tier 2 Monthly DIBLES, AR STAR M, Program Progress
Tier III
Assessment
– EL- IPT listening/speaking
– Test used in other Tiers
 Delivery
– Small group (3 - 4)
 Monitor
– Weekly DIBLES
– Biweekly program monitor
– IEP Quarterly Check

OAKHURST ELEMENTARY
OAKHURST
Screening for Program Placement Worksheet
Interventions
= entry field
School Name: Oakhurst Elementary School
District Name: Bass Lake Joint Union Elementary District
Teacher/Test Gr 4 /
Oakhurst Elementary School
Bass Lake Joint Union
Gr 4 /
Fluency Intervention
Programs
Star AR
Decoding Intervention Programs
San
Indicate if Special Education Student
ELL CELDT 07'
SE
EL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
ELL CELDT 09'
ELL CELDT 08'
CST EnglishLanguage
Arts
Score
Year:
2007
CST EnglishLanguage
Arts
Score
Year:
2007
EI
EI
I
I
EI
I
I
EI
I
A
A
EA
2008
score
300
SE
Post
2008
score
\
139
64
57
104
122
78
80
B
PRO
BB
FBB
B
BB
PRO
PRO
334
367
267
251
327
282
387
367
B
PRO
BB
B
B
BB
\
B
300
383
285
307
314
285
\
318
103
95
97
PR0
PRO
B
354
362
317
B
B
B
307
326
330
114
112
126
PRO
BB
B
376
285
342
PRO
BB
B
361
285
338
EA
I
SE
SE
I
EA
102
122
126
100
113
140
B
Pro
Pro
\
PRO
B
306
381
381
\
362
334
B
Pro
Pro
PRO
B
B
318
381
375
366
307
300
85
96
33
62
71
BB
B
BB
\
BB
278
323
274
\
289
BB
BB
FBB
BB
BB
281
270
242
285
262
88
163
53
38
89
68
107
67
74
93
66
70
133
59
88
89
97
81
90
105
89
118
109
110
93
63
65
83
26
63
62
Target
105
CWPM
Target
118
CWMP
Passage/
Grade
Level
50
4
109
160
69
74
104
92
134
83
106
114
93
96
171
79
111
124
141
91
97
109
102
153
103
130
95
78
82
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
45
79
86
Test
Pre
Date test Date test
given
given:
Test
May 09' Aubg 08'
Jan 09'
Target
93
CWPM
340
EA
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
May 08 ORF
Target 3rd 110
Student Grade Level
Examp
Jane Doe
le
Pseudoword Decoding
Dibles Grade 4
6
Student
Name
Diego Quick
136
111
Target
118
CWPM
Inst
Passage
Grade
Level
CW
post test
Date test
given:
May
09'
Inst
Passage
Grade
Level
CW
0
4
8
2
2
4
2
10
9
9
10
4
10
2
10
3
9
3
10
4
4
4
3
1
2
9
10
8
10
10
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
5
6
2
30
31
32
34
(Highest
Unit
Complet
ed)
Date test
given:
Pre Test
Post Test
Date test given:
Date test given:
Aug 08'
May 09'
Aug 08'
Grade Level
grade level
Grade
Level of
Passage
Grade
Level of
Passage
A
D
0
6
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
5
6
2
31
32
33
34
3.3
5.7
2.5
2.1
3
2.5
4.5
4.6
3.6
4,7
4.9
2.5
5.8
3.1
3.9
3.6
3.4
4.4
3.2
6.6
3.6
4.8
5
4.6
4.6
2.3
3.8
3.8
1.5
2.3
2.8
3.1
1.3
Pre Test
Date test
given:
Jan 09'
4.4
4
2.5
2.4
4.8
3.3
4.1
5.4
3.9
5.6
4.1
3.8
6.6
4.5
5.1
4.3
4.5
4.4
3.6
5.1
4.6
5.6
4.5
3.5
5.7
2.6
2.7
3
May 09'
Planning Instructional Groupings
 Team
process
 Relied heavily on Dibels data
– Must determine most important
indicator
 Analyzed
other diagnostic measures
 Analyzed STAR CST testing levels
Examples of Elementary Tier I
Instructional Materials

Teachers have the freedom to use their
professional judgment in providing
differentiated instruction
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Open Court: Reteach
Open Court: ELD component
Hampton Brown
SRA
Readers Theater
Literature Circles
Partner Reading
Teacher directed grouping
Team teaching
Examples of Elementary Tier II
Instructional Materials
Lexia: primary reading/ CD Rom,
-(phonemic awareness and phonics)
Rewards: Intermediate level,
-(multisyllabic decoding)
Read Naturally: tapes and CD Rom,
-(fluency)
Drops in the Bucket/Frog Games
-(language skills)
After School Achievers Reading Club
- (reading strategies/language skills/comprehension)
Hampton Brown: (language Development for EL’s)
Guided Reading Book Sets
Examples of Elementary Tier III
Instructional Materials
 Orton
Gillingham/Zoophonics
 Steck Vaughn Power up
(intermediate CD Rom/online)
 Read Naturally
 Edmark reading (CD)
 Some students/Language focus
For More Information






National High School Centerwww.betterhighschools.org
National Center on RTIwww.rti4success.org
Center on Instructionwww.centeroninstruction.org
RTI Wire
www.jimwrightonline.com
Iris Center- Vanderbilt University
http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/resour
ces.htmlhttp://iriscenter.com/about_broc
hures/IRIS_RTI_Brochure.pdf