RTI Implementer Webinar Series: What Is a Multi-level Prevention System? National Center on Response to Intervention National Center on Response to Intervention RTI Implementer Series Overview Introduction Screening Progress Monitoring Multi-level Prevention System Defining the Essential Components What Is RTI? What Is Screening? What Is Progress Monitoring? What Is a Multilevel Prevention System? Assessment and Data-based Decision Making Understanding Types of Assessment within an RTI Framework Using Screening Data for Decision Making Using Progress Monitoring Data for Decision Making IDEA and Multilevel Prevention System Establishing Processes Implementing RTI Establishing a Screening Process National Center on Response to Intervention Selecting Evidence-based Practices 2 Session Agenda The multi-level prevention system Primary prevention level Secondary prevention level Tertiary prevention level National Center on Response to Intervention 3 Upon Completion Participants Will Be Able To: Understand the multi-level prevention system and describe each level Use screening and progress monitoring data to make decisions at all levels of the multilevel prevention system, including movement between levels. National Center on Response to Intervention 4 Vocabulary Handout Word Prediction Final Meaning Primary prevention level The bottom of the pyramid that represents instruction given to students without learning problems Instruction delivered to all students using research-based curricula and differentiation in the general education classroom. Incorporates universal screening, continuous progress monitoring, and outcome measures or summative assessments. National Center on Response to Intervention Picture/Sketch/Example Primary prevention 5 Defining the Three Levels Handout Primary Prevention Which students? Secondary Prevention Tertiary Prevention All students Approximately what % of the population? How is instruction defined? National Center on Response to Intervention 6 Essential Components of RTI National Center on Response to Intervention 7 Levels, Tiers, and Interventions Tertiary Level of Prevention (~ 5 % of students) Primary Level of Prevention (~80% of students) National Center on Response to Intervention Secondary Level of Prevention (~15% of students) FRAMEWORK3 levels of intensity: • Primary • Secondary • Tertiary 8 Levels, Tiers, and Interventions Tier III (tertiary) Tier II (secondary) MODEL: Minimum of 3 tiers representing each level of intensity Tier I (primary) National Center on Response to Intervention 9 Levels, Tiers, and Interventions Tertiary Level of Prevention Secondary Level of Prevention Interventions are provided at each level and within each tier. Primary Level of Prevention National Center on Response to Intervention 10 NCRTI recommends different evidence standards across intervention levels. Research-based curricula • Recommended for primary prevention across subjects. • Components have been researched and found to be generally effective. • Curriculum materials have not been rigorously evaluated as a package. Evidence-based intervention • Recommended for secondary and tertiary prevention • Materials evaluated using rigorous research design • Evidence of positive effects for students who received the intervention (NCRTI, 2010) National Center on Response to Intervention 11 PRIMARY PREVENTION LEVEL National Center on Response to Intervention 12 Primary Prevention Level FOCUS: ALL students INSTRUCTION: District curriculum and instructional practices that are research based; aligned with state or district standards; and incorporate differentiated instruction SETTING: Regular education classroom ASSESSMENTS: Screening, continuous progress monitoring, and outcome measures or summative assessments National Center on Response to Intervention 13 Primary Prevention Focus ALL students Includes students with disabilities, learning differences, or language barriers Increase access through • Differentiated instruction • Practices that are linguistically and culturally responsive • Accommodations • Modifications National Center on Response to Intervention 14 Primary Level Instruction Research-based curriculum materials for students (including subgroups) Implementation fidelity Articulation of teaching and learning within and across grades Differentiation of instruction based on data Ongoing professional development National Center on Response to Intervention See NCRTI Integrity Rubric 15 What Is Core Curriculum in RTI? Course of study deemed critical Usually mandatory for all students of a school or a school system Often instituted at the elementary and secondary school levels by local school boards, departments of education, or other administrative agencies charged with overseeing education National Center on Response to Intervention 16 What Are Differentiated Learning Activities? Offers students in the same class different teaching and learning strategies based on • Student assessment data and knowledge of student readiness • Learning preferences • Language and culture National Center on Response to Intervention 17 What Are Differentiated Learning Activities? Involves • Mixed instructional groupings, • Team teaching, • Peer tutoring, • Learning centers, and • Accommodations to ensure that all students have access to the instructional program Is NOT the same as providing more intensive interventions to students with learning disabilities National Center on Response to Intervention 18 Primary Prevention Setting Regular education classroom or similar setting Various grouping strategies (examples): • • • Whole class Cooperative learning groups Peer dyads National Center on Response to Intervention 19 Primary Prevention Assessment Universal screening to determine students’ current level of performance Continuous progress monitoring to confirm risk status and monitor progress of at-risk students Outcome measures or summative assessments for accountability National Center on Response to Intervention 20 Progress Monitoring and Screening Data Within Primary Prevention Screening data • Identify students who need additional assessment or instruction. • Evaluate the effectiveness of primary prevention for all students. Progress monitoring data • Confirm and disconfirm risk. National Center on Response to Intervention 21 Screening: Identify Students Who Need Additional Assessment and Instruction Benchmark Scores for Grade 2 Screening Measure 70 Above average Score 60 50 Average 40 Below average 30 Student 20 10 Fall National Center on Response to Intervention 22 Screening: Evaluate Effectiveness of Primary Prevention Target score 140 General population Title I Score 120 100 Special education 80 60 40 20 Fall National Center on Response to Intervention Winter Spring 23 Digits Correct in 3 Minutes Progress Monitoring: Confirming Risk Status 25 20 15 X 10 X 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Weeks of Instruction National Center on Response to Intervention 24 Problems Correct in 3 Minutes Progress Monitoring: Confirming Risk Status 25 20 15 10 X 5 X 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Weeks of Instruction National Center on Response to Intervention 25 SECONDARY PREVENTION LEVEL National Center on Response to Intervention 26 Secondary Prevention Level FOCUS: Students identified through screening as at risk for poor learning outcomes INSTRUCTION: Targeted, supplemental instruction delivered to small groups SETTING: Regular education classroom or other regular education location within the school ASSESSMENTS: Progress monitoring, diagnostic National Center on Response to Intervention 27 Secondary Prevention Focus Students identified through screening as at risk for poor learning outcomes Typically 15%-20% of entire population National Center on Response to Intervention 28 Secondary Level Instruction Evidence based Aligns with and supports core instruction Implementation fidelity based on developer guidelines Delivered by well-trained staff in optimal group sizes Decisions are based on valid and reliable data and criteria are implemented accurately See NCRTI Supplements core instruction National Center on Response to Intervention Integrity Rubric 29 Secondary Prevention Setting Regular education classroom or similar setting Adult-led instruction Small group rather than whole class National Center on Response to Intervention 30 Secondary Prevention Assessment Decisions about responsiveness to intervention • Are based on reliable and valid progress monitoring data. • Reflect judgment based on the slope of improvement or final status at the end of the intervention period. Decision-making rules are applied accurately and consistently National Center on Response to Intervention 31 Secondary Prevention Assessment Progress monitoring • Monitor student response to secondary instruction. • Evaluate the efficacy of the secondary system. • Conduct at least monthly. Diagnostic assessment • Match students’ needs to interventions. National Center on Response to Intervention 32 Secondary Prevention Goal Setting End-of-year benchmarking National norms for weekly rate of improvement (slope) National Center on Response to Intervention 33 Progress Monitoring Data Within Secondary Prevention Progress monitoring data • Determine response to secondary interventions using The four-point rule. Trend-line analysis. • Compare efficacy of secondary interventions. National Center on Response to Intervention 34 Progress Monitoring: Determining Response Using the Four-Point Rule X X National Center on Response to Intervention Goal line 35 Progress Monitoring: Determining Response Using Trend Line Analysis Trend line X X X X National Center on Response to Intervention Goal line 36 Progress Monitoring: Compare Efficacy of Secondary Interventions Words Read Correctly Growth by Intervention Type 50 40 30 Intervention A 20 Intervention B Intervention C 10 0 Week 1 National Center on Response to Intervention Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 37 Progress Monitoring: Evaluate Efficacy of Secondary System Data should indicate the following: • Most students benefit from secondary interventions, but a small percent will need more intensive, individualized instruction (tertiary) • Implementation fidelity for interventions and databased decision rules National Center on Response to Intervention 38 TERTIARY PREVENTION LEVEL National Center on Response to Intervention 39 Tertiary Prevention Level FOCUS: Students who have not responded to primary or secondary level prevention INSTRUCTION: Intensive, supplemental instruction delivered to small groups or individually SETTING: Regular education classroom or other appropriate setting within the school ASSESSMENTS: Progress monitoring, diagnostic National Center on Response to Intervention 40 Tertiary Prevention Focus Students who have not responded to primary or secondary level prevention Typically 3%-5% of the entire population National Center on Response to Intervention 41 Tertiary Level Instruction Evidence-based or based on validated progress monitoring methods for individualizing instruction More intense than secondary Implementation fidelity Delivered by well-trained staff in optimal group sizes Decisions are based on valid and reliable data, and criteria are implemented accurately. Address general education curriculum in appropriate manner for students. See NCRTI Integrity Rubric National Center on Response to Intervention 42 Tertiary Prevention Setting Regular education classroom or other appropriate setting Decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. Optimal group size is chosen for ages and needs of students. National Center on Response to Intervention 43 Tertiary Prevention Assessment Decisions about responsiveness to intervention • Are based on reliable and valid progress monitoring data. • Reflect judgment based on the slope of improvement or final status at the end of the intervention period. Decision-making rules are in place and applied accurately. National Center on Response to Intervention 44 Tertiary Prevention Assessment Progress monitoring • Frequent progress monitoring (ideally weekly) is recommended. • Continuously monitor progress based on established learning trajectories indicated by the goal line. Diagnostic • Match instruction to needs. • Inform individualized instructional planning. National Center on Response to Intervention 45 Tertiary Prevention: Goal Setting End-of-year benchmarking National norms for weekly rate of improvement (slope) Intra-individual National Center on Response to Intervention 46 Progress Monitoring Data Within Tertiary Prevention Progress monitoring data • Determine response to secondary interventions using The four-point rule. Trend line analysis. Trend line analysis and slope. • Compare efficacy of tertiary interventions. National Center on Response to Intervention 47 Progress Monitoring: Determining Response Using Four-Point Rule X X National Center on Response to Intervention Goal line 48 Words Read Correctly Progress Monitoring: Determining Response Using Trend Line Analysis 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 X Trend line Goal line X X X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Weeks of Instruction National Center on Response to Intervention 49 Words Read Correctly Progress Monitoring: Determining Response Using Trend Line Analysis and Slope 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Student’s new goal and slope: (28 – 6) ÷ 11 = 2.0 slope Trend line X X Goal line X 1 2 X X 3 4 5 6 7 8 X 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Weeks of Instruction National Center on Response to Intervention 50 Progress Monitoring: Compare Efficacy of Tertiary Interventions Growth by Intervention Type Words Read Correctly 50 40 30 Intervention A 20 Intervention B Intervention C 10 0 Week 1 National Center on Response to Intervention Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 51 Progress Monitoring: Evaluate Efficacy of Tertiary System Data should indicate the following: • Majority of students in tertiary prevention are demonstrating adequate progress • Implementation fidelity for interventions, program implementation, and data decision rules National Center on Response to Intervention 52 Changing the Intensity and Nature of Instruction Intervention (including adaptations to the intervention based on students’ data) Duration Frequency Interventionist Group size National Center on Response to Intervention 53 Need More Information? National Center on Response to Intervention www.rti4success.org RTI Action Network www.rtinetwork.org IDEA Partnership www.ideapartnership.org National Center on Response to Intervention 54 National Center on Response to Intervention This document was produced under U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs Grant No. H326E070004 Grace Zamora Durán and Tina Diamond served as the OSEP project officers. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this publication is intended or should be inferred. This product is public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: www.rti4success.org. National Center on Response to Intervention 55