


Drew Wellman, Director of Learning and Student Services for the Lake Mills Area School District
 Lake Mills Area School District—1,400 student K-12
RtI Background




Contributing “architect” to two different systems
Thesis
Extensive PD
Admitted RtI super geek
 Grew out of experiences as school psych
Gifted and Talented Background
 Limited experience in GT Prior to D.L.S.S.
 Steep learning curve!

 Why the Lake Mills Story?
 Highlights of the Lake Mills Talent Development
Program
 LMASD RtI Efforts and the Connection to Talent
Development
 LMASD TD Program
 PLEASE—Ask Questions as we Go!

 History—3 Years Ago
 No “program”


Random assortment of good interventions
Inequitable service delivery


Many “false starts”
No decision making framework


No qualifying criteria
Stand alone program


One staff member in charge
Limited budget

 Progress—Previous 1 ½ Years



Comprehensive Resource Guide
 Begged, borrowed, and stole from many places
Tightly connected to RtI efforts
 System imbedded
Distributed leadership model


Daily supports for students
Equitable identification processes


Talent Development philosophical orientation
Still have a long way to go!
 Still a limited budget ($1,000)!





From Disjointed to Connected
 Particularly as it applies to RtI
From Random Acts of Good Intervention to Daily Supports
From No Decision Making Framework to a Comprehensive
Decision Making Framework
From No Philosophical Orientation to a Talent
Development Philosophical Orientation
 The LMASD chooses to adopt the language of TD instead of the more prevalent language of GT. In doing so, we hope to advance a support system that is more inclusive and flexible than traditional gifted education approaches, while at the same time maintaining a commitment to promoting individualized learning experiences for our most talented students.

 About 1 ½ Years and Almost $0 Dollars
 No Special Expertise
 If You’re Where We Were—Our Story May Help
 If You’re Looking to Partner with RtI Efforts—Our
Story May Help

 Highlights


Talent Development Identification

3 Tiers—Tier 1 has no floor…everyone qualifies

Tri-annual data meetings


Promote fluid identification of students
Natural opportunities to discuss student strengths
Talent Development Service Delivery



Most services provided at Tier 1…all have access
Specific and individualized supports at Tier 2 and Tier 3

Differentiated Education Plan (DEP)
30 minutes a day with a TD teacher K-8

Teachers make the difference!
 Distributed Leadership Approach




We set out to establish a great RtI framework to support struggling learners…along the way realized this fits perfect for TD
The same principles/actions/structures that apply to struggling learners apply to TD


MTSS, balanced assessment system, data-based decision making, problem solving process
Intentionally layered TD supports into everything RtI—it became a “rule” that when discussing RtI we must include TD
Interest convergence—Provides wonderful opportunity to grow and strengthen TD efforts for all districts

Assessment-
Screening and Progress
Monitoring
Data
Based
Decision
Making
 Evidence Based
 Improved Student
Outcomes
 Education for All
Students
Problem
Solving
Process
Multi-Tiered
System of
Supports

S/E/B Reading Math Writing
2 nd Step Universal Guided Reading
Readers Workshop
Everyday Math Step Up
Writers Workshop
Sitton
PM-Data Behavior Plan
Recording
Office Referrals
Writing Benchmark
Sitton Assessment
Selected
+30 Minutes
PM Monthly
PM-Data
Targeted
+30 Minutes
PM Weekly
Behavior Plan
Check-in Check-out
Behavior Plan
Recording
Office Referrals
FBA
Behavior Plan
Check-in Check-out
MAP
Running Rec.
AIMSweb
GL Assessment
MAP
AIMSweb
Everyday Math-IPP’s
Comprehension Toolkit
Decoding Groups
SRA-Reading Mastery
A-Z Reading
LLI
SuccessMaker
Odyssey (I&E)
Reaching all Readers
TD Groups
MAP
Running Records
AIMSweb
GL Assessment
Number Worlds
Fundamentals
Think Tanks (E)
DreamBox (I&E)
Odyssey (I&E)
TD Groups
MAP
AIMSweb
Everyday Math-IPP’s
ERE
SRA-Reading Mastery
LLI
SuccessMaker
Number Worlds
Connected Math
Odyssey
Classroom Intervention
TD Groups
Writing Benchmark
Sitton Assessment
Classroom Intervention

S/E/B Reading Math Writing
Universal 2 nd Step
Guidance Lessons
Health
Guided Reading
Core Reading
Everyday Math
Core Math
Core Writing
Writers Workshop
PM-Data Behavior Plan Recording
Office Referrals
MAP
Running Rec.
AIMSweb
MAP
AIMSweb
Everyday Math-IPP’s
Writing Benchmark
Sitton Assessment
Selected
+30 Minutes
PM Monthly
Behavior Plan
Check-in Check-out
Comprehension Toolkit
Jamestown Reading Nav.
Wilson Reading
A-Z Reading
Reaching all Readers
TD Groups
ALEKS
Think Tanks (E)
PreTeach/ReTeach
TD Groups
Classroom Intervention
TD Groups
PM-Data
Targeted
+30 Minutes
PM Weekly
Behavior Plan Recording
Office Referrals
FBA
Behavior Plan
Check-in Check-out
MAP
Running Records
AIMSweb
MAP
AIMSweb
Everyday Math-IPP’s
Jamestown Reading Nav.
Wilson Reading
A-Z Reading
ALEKS
Odyssey
Writing Benchmark
Sitton Assessment
Classroom Intervention

Elementary School L-Cat Time
(Intervention)
Roving Resources
Kindergarten
1 st Grade
2 nd Grade
12:00-12:30
12:40-1:10
1:20-1:50
*Staff (Special Education,
Para-Educators,
Specialists)
*Narrow responsibilities
*1 teacher/grade assigned TD group
*Computers
*Curriculum
3 rd Grade 2:00-2:30
4 th Grade 2:40-3:10

Assessment-
Screening and Progress
Monitoring
Data
Based
Decision
Making
 Evidence Based
 Improved Student
Outcomes
 Education for All
Students
Problem
Solving
Process
Multi-Tiered
System of
Supports

 Three Assessment Window’s Each Year
 Fall, Winter, Spring
 Three Data Meetings Follow Testing
 Grade level K-8
 Place students into intervention groups
 Review student progress
 Promotes fluidity of placement
 Equity in identification
 Balanced Assessment System

AC
T
PLAN
EXPL
ORE
WKCE WK
CE
MAP: Reading, Math, Language
AIMSweb: Reading and Math
Writing Benchmark
Running Records
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Assessment Grades Fall Window Winter Window Spring
Window
K-8
K-5
X
X
X
X
X
X
AIMSweb
Running
Records
Writing
Benchmark
MAP
WKCE
EXPLORE
PLAN
ACT
K-5
2-7
3-8, 10
8
9-10
11
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

 Assessment Windows and Data Meetings



Top students are discussed regularly
Placement into the TD groups is fluid and activity/assessment dependent

I.E., Problem solving activities for a 1/3 of the year in 3 rd grade— students with strong creativity, curiosity, cognitive abilities selected for the TD group



I.E., Math activities for a 1/3 of the year—students with strong math skills selected
Still evolving these efforts
Generally top 10%-15% of students may “fit”
Consistently high performance will prompt a TD referral for a
DEP

Assessment-
Screening and Progress
Monitoring
Data
Based
Decision
Making
 Evidence Based
 Improved Student
Outcomes
 Education for All
Students
Problem
Solving
Process
Multi-Tiered
System of
Supports

 Tri-Annual Data Meetings
 In-Depth Student Decisions for Tier 2 and Tier 3
 Struggling and talented students
 Lake Mills Specific Processes


Binder system
Student Services monitors/tracks intervention placements
 Student Services communicates student needs grade-tograde
 Talent Development Advocates communicates TD student needs grade-to-grade

 Tri-annual Data Meetings Tool
 See Excel Data Wall

 Interest Convergence
 MTSS-Supports for struggling and advanced learners


Daily contact for all students with a key teacher
Fluid placement
 Balanced Assessment



Multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate deficits and strengths
Ability to monitor progress over time and compare to benchmarks
Information contributes to tri-annual data meetings
 Problem Solving Process
 The system that “makes the wheels go ‘round”

 System for Struggling Learners Can Be the
Same/Similar for Advanced Learners



Advocate for alignment rather than independence

Allowed us to implement services and processes quickly
Advocate for time in the day for intervention

Opinion: The ONLY way to be true to the RtI framework in a meaningful way
Advocate for built in data meetings to review student progress

LM: Simple step of “calendarizing” assessment and meeting windows institutionalized the process quickly

 Shift to Program Specifics
 LMASD TD Resource Guide
 Identification processes
 Services
 Staff roles/responsibilities
 Additional Tidbits
 Issues

 A “Frankensteined” Resource
 Begged, borrowed, and stole from everywhere
 No good idea left alone!
 TD Resource Guide
 Provides the framework for our work
 Developed throughout a one-year process
 Included K-12 educators and parents
 See LMASD Talent Development Resource Guide




Tier III


Top 1%
Performance, assessment, supporting data
Tier II


Top 2%
Performance, assessment, supporting data
Tier I


Top 97%
 No ID floor
Performance, assessment, supporting data
 5 Qualifying Areas
 Tier II and III potentially 10% of student population




Tier III
 Exceptional needs met through DEP process (i.e., grade acceleration)
Tier II
 Exceptional needs met through DEP process (i.e., subject acceleration)
Tier I


Access to most extension/enrichment opportunities
Needs met largely through
RtI process




Tier 1



Needs met largely through classroom differentiation
Competitions, clubs, etc.
RtI Intervention Time
Tier 2



DEP—partnership with students and families
Possible subject level acceleration
Everything in Tier 1
Tier 3



DEP—partnership with students and families
Possible subject and/or grade level acceleration
Everything in Tier 1 and Tier 2

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Intellectual or
Academically Able
• Classroom Differentiation
• Flex Grouping
• Enrichment Programs
• Tiered Lessons
• Independent Classes
• WCATY
• Online Courses
• Learning Contracts
• DEP
• Cluster Groupings
• Compacted Curriculum
• Mentoring
• Content Area Acceleration
• Independent Classes
• DEP
• Accelerated Content Area
Cluster Grouping
• Individualized Program
• Formal Mentorship
• Grade Acceleration
• Content Area Acceleration
• Independent Classes
• College for Kids
Artistic
Leadership
Creativity
• Forensics
• Art Show
• Musicals
• Student Council
• Independent Projects
• Differentiation
• Art Show
• Music Concert
• Visual Arts Classic
• Honors Classes
• Student Council
• Targeted Leadership Training
• Peer Mediation
• Mentoring/Tutoring
• Rube Goldburg Challenge
• Creativity Groups
• Creativity Units
• Future Problem-Solving
• Technology Integration
• Mentorship
• Apprenticeship with an artist
• JEDI Classes
• Independent Art/Music
• College for Kids
• UW-Outreach Programs (i.e.,
Moving Minds, Youth and Parent
Leadership Forum, Science on
Wheels)
• College for Kids
• Mentoring
• UW-Outreach Programs

 Differentiated Education Plans
 Tier 2 and Tier 3
 Describes



PLOP
Goals
Services

Individualized classes, learning path, subject/grade acceleration, additional assessments, etc.
 Meet at least annually
 Minimally—LEA, TDA, teacher at meeting

 All Staff are Advocates for Talented Students
 Distributed Leadership Model
 Decision making at building/class level
 TDA’s, intervention teachers
 Empowering staff
 Examples
 Timeliness of response to students and parents
 Staff roles tied into “action teams”
 Increased capacity for awesomeness!





DLSS
 Oversee program
Principal
 Oversee building level program
Talent Development Advocates
 Most important!
 Consultation, DEP team participation, professional development, identification and tracking responsibilities, organizational responsibilities, etc.
Student Services
 Assist in identification (specifically formal testing), student supports, and RtI system components

 Process
 Organization/Program Architecture for TD



9 months, K-12 committee, professional staff and administration, 3 meetings
Parent group provided input in 3 meetings
June 2012 Board approval of Talent Development Resource
Guide
 Organization/Program Architecture for RtI


Extensive and ongoing
Different buildings at different places

 Roll Out
 Imbedded in RtI efforts 11-12


“Build the plane as it flies”
Principals and TDA’s helped implement
 Explicit 12-13 in RtI system
 TD Resource Guide Available on Web
 www.lakemills.k12.wi.us

Student Services—Talent Development—Talent Development
Resource Guide
 Building Level Presentations

 At-Risk/Special Education Influences
 Unique learners need a person
 Non-categorical identification fits most students
 Special education process can be informative
 Frequency of meetings, meeting participants, information for plans, etc.
 Supports need to be imbedded into daily practice or they will not be implemented with fidelity
 Services, accommodations/modifications, differentiation

 Moved Very Quickly
 Can the foundation support the program?



Intervention teachers have steep learning curve
TDA’s are learning to be consultants on the fly
RtI system is still working out the “bugs”
 Staff/parent communication and understanding

 Tier 1 Identification Criteria
 Is the “everyone qualifies” approach good?
 Tier 2 and 3 Identification Criteria
 Is 98 th and above percentile too restrictive? Or, with 5 qualifying areas, is this too broad (theoretically, 10% of student population identified)
 DEP’s
 Can we manage the administration of these plans?
 What’s so different?




Equitable Identification


All students get their individual needs met
The most talented students are identified and supported in an individualized manner
Sustainable
 Not dependent on one person


Approach becomes cultural
Efforts ease for individual teachers as “system” picks up
Improved Outcomes
 More engagement, higher scores, happier students, happier families

 Intervention Teachers and TDA’s
 Become experts in TD
 “Own” their TD responsibilities—take professional development into their own hands
 Create a welcoming environment for students
 Become an essential partner with students and families

 Drew Wellman
 drew.wellman@lakemills.k12.wi.us
 920-648-2474