Running head: USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
Problem-Based Organizational Improvement Proposal:
Raising Student Achievement Using a Multi-tiered System of Support
Suzanne Averitt
East Carolina University
1
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
Problem
Several elementary schools in a medium-sized district with a combination of
rural, suburban and urban schools (referred to subsequently by its shortened form:
Medium District) have continuously struggled to raise student achievement, while others
have been able to maintain much higher levels of proficiency. The lowest performing
schools in Medium District are the rural and urban schools with a high percentage of
students who come from families identified with low socio-economic status (SES). A
wide variety of strategies at the state, district and school level have been implemented at
these schools in an effort to correct the academic discrepancies noted at the schools. The
strategies have included changes in leadership, smaller class sizes, curriculum coach
support, and various academic programming changes. While the efforts have been
substantial, the improvements have been slow to materialize, and, in general, have not
been sustained. End-of-grade (EOG) testing data continue to show large discrepancies in
proficiency levels between the suburban schools and the majority of the rural and urban
In fact, testing from the 2013-2014 school year shows a 46% difference in EOG
composite scores between the highest scoring suburban school and the lowest performing
urban school, as shown in figure 1. In addition, seven out of eight suburban schools
performed above the district average whereas, in strong contrast, six out of seven of the
rural and urban schools performed below the district average.
Just as end of grade testing is an indicator of low school performance for third
through fifth grade, the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy (DIBELS)
2
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
3
assessments measure the achievement of students in kindergarten through second grade.
Matlock (2013) showed a high correlation between 1st grade fluency scores on the
DIBELS assessment and student performance on end of grade testing. District data shows
that first grade students in the lowest performing elementary schools began their
academic careers as much as a 50% less proficient in DIBELS than their cohorts in the
highest performing schools. So, the question becomes, if students enter urban and rural
schools at a disadvantage, what can those schools do to raise achievement and close
achievement gaps between their schools and the higher performing suburban schools.
90
2013-14 EOG
scores
80
S8
S6
70
S4
S5
S3
S7
S1
S2
60
U3
U2
R4
R3
50
R2
40
Series1
R1
U1
30
20
10
0
% low SES
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Figure 1. The average percent proficient on 2013-2014 EOG composite scores in
Medium School District is disaggregated by Urban (U1-3), Rural (R1-4) and Suburban
(S1-8) schools.
100
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
Purpose
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001) mandated that schools must find
ways to close achievement gaps between specific subgroups and also sets the expectation
that students must be reading at grade level by the end of third grade. In addition, schools
must use research based programs and interventions to aid in student achievement. In
response to NCLB and other federal laws, experts such as Fuchs and Fuchs (2006)
introduced a new process for identifying and teaching struggling students. This general
education initiative was called Response to Intervention (RtI), or Multi-tiered System of
Support (MTSS). The intent of RtI is to identify at-risk students early and remediate their
academic weaknesses through a three-tiered approach to instruction. Tier I, or core
instruction, includes all students and refers to the teaching and learning that occur in the
regular classroom setting. Tiers II and III are aimed at meeting the needs of students who
fail to demonstrate adequate growth in the core instruction environment.
The purpose of this action research dissertation study is to use a MTSS approach
to strengthen core instruction for all students and, additionally, develop data driven
supplemental and intensive academic supports for students who demonstrate additional
needs. Issues and concerns vary from school to school. For instance, several of the urban
schools have high levels English Language Learners (ELL) students while others have
large numbers of students from low socio-economic households. As described by Stringer
(2014), the purpose of action research is “to build collaboratively constructed
descriptions and interpretations of events that enable groups of people to formulate
mutually acceptable solutions to their problems” (p. 40). Therefore, schools will
individually develop their own action plans for improved student achievement based on
4
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
5
the results of their data analysis in conjunction with an analysis of their core instructional
practices. Action plans will reflect the stakeholders’ beliefs about student learning and
will include a plan for professional development that is appropriate to the specific needs
of the school. Plans will be created at each grade level, to address unique needs and
requirements of the grades, as well as at the school level, to address school wide issues
and concerns.
Improvement Goal
Currently, there is a wide discrepancy between student proficiency on composite
EOG scores in the highest performing schools (suburban schools) and lowest performing
schools (urban and rural). In fact, analysis of EOG data from the 2013-2014 school year
indicates a 21.38% discrepancy between the two, as shown in Figure 1. The improvement
goal for this action research is to close the gap between the school types by 5% over the
next two years through the implementation of MTSS and efforts to strengthen core
instruction to meet the needs of the majority of students.
Questions and Tasks
During the process of this action research, questions will be posed and tasks associated
with those questions will be completed. The projected outcomes of the completion of these tasks
are that data are used to effectively adjust instruction, 80% of students show grade level
proficiency within core instruction as measured by Reading 3D data, and the EOG achievement
gap between school groups is closed by 5%.
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
6
70.00%
66.38%
56.40%
60.00%
45%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Suburban
District
Urban/Rural
Figure 1. The average percent proficient on 2013-2014 EOG composite scores in
Medium School District, is disaggregated by Suburban, whole district and Urban/Rural
schools.
How can implementing MTSS help raise student achievement?
Several tasks will be completed in order to answer this question. First, school
administrators will receive training from state MTSS consultants so they can begin to understand
how MTSS can benefit their students and staff. Additionally, this will enable principals to
recognize school level changes that may need to be made to help prepare for implementation of
MTSS. Once principals have received training, the MTSS coach, with assistance from school
psychologists, will go to schools and introduce MTSS to all staff members. Finally, the MTSS
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
coach will meet with grade levels at each of the schools for further discussions about how the
framework can help them identify both whole class and individual student needs.
How do schools implement MTSS?
As O’Connor and Freeman (2012) note, “in many situations where schools are
struggling to initiate or sustain momentum for their RtI efforts, we observe there is not a
coherent support structure built in at the more macro level of the school system—the district
level” (p.297). In an effort to avoid this pitfall, a district level MTSS (also referred to as
Response to Intervention or RtI) team will be established. This team will consist of key district
level personnel and will meet regularly to analyze school and district data in order to identify
professional development needs and to make recommendations to the district cabinet about next
steps in the process.
School level MTSS teams will be formed and trained to use a Team Initiated Problem
Solving (TIPS) process to identify issues and professional development needs that may be
unique to their school. Data used to determine those needs will include EOG and DIBELS
results, office referrals, and results from a beliefs survey developed by Florida Problem
Solving/Response to Intervention Project (2008).
How do teachers apply the MTSS framework to raise student achievement?
The first task that must be completed in order to begin to answer this question is an
analysis of current core instructional practices. Teachers will identify strategies and materials
they use to teach specific skills to their students and whether the instruction is done with the
whole group, small groups, or one-on-one. After that analysis is complete, they will look at
assessment data to determine whether their current practices are effective and to make
7
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
8
adjustments to their instruction if the data indicates the need. If 80% of students are academically
successful with core instruction, teachers will go on to identify specific learning needs for those
students who are not achieving proficiency with core instruction alone. Finally, learning
opportunities will be developed to meet the needs of the under achieving students.
Did the implementation of MTSS close the achievement gap between the lowest and highest
performing schools?
A final analysis of school wide EOG and DIBELS data from 2016-2017 results will be
completed and the data will be compared to the information from the 2013-2014 school year.
Graphs and pivot tables will be developed to create a visual representation of the results.
RAISING STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT USING A MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORT
9
Plan for Raising Student Achievement by
Implementing a Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS)
Planned Implementation of Action Research
Research
Question
Tasks
Outputs
How can
implementing
MTSS help raise
student
achievement?
Professional
development for
administrators,
school and grade
level staff.
Administration
and staff
understanding of
RtI and processes
associated with it.
How do schools
implement
MTSS?
Development of
district and school
MTSS team.
Administration
and teachers
understand how to
use data to guide
instruction.
Completion of
beliefs survey
Data analysis
Intended Results
Outcomes
Impact
Administrators and
staff see the value
in using MTSS
process to raise
student
achievement.
Implementation is
completed with
fidelity.
A cohesive plan is
created both at the
district level and
the school level.
School district
supports the efforts of
schools with
professional
development and
funding
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
10
Planned Implementation of Action Research
Research
Question
How do teachers
apply the MTSS
framework to
raise student
achievement?
Tasks
Complete original
core analysis
Analysis
student/grade level
data
Adjust core
instruction
Develop
appropriate
instructional
practices
Did the
implementation
of MTSS close the
achievement gap
between the
lowest and
highest
performing
schools?
Analysis of EOG
data
Comparison of
baseline data to
current year’s data
Outputs
Heightened
understanding of
direct correlation
between
instructional
practices and
student
achievement.
Increased ability to
use data to match
instruction and
student needs
Graphs and charts
indicating the level
of improvement
Intended Results
Outcomes
Data is used
effectively to
change
instructional
practices.
All students
receive
comprehensive
core instruction.
A belief that using
the MTSS
framework can
help raise student
achievement
Impact
Increased student
achievement
Increased number
of students meeting
local and state
standards
Continued student
achievement
Additional
narrowing of the
gap over time.
RAISING STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT USING A MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORT
References
Buffum, A., Mattos, M., & Weber, C. (2010). The why behind RTI. Educational Leadership,
68(2), 10-16.
Editorial Projects in Education Research Center. (2011, September 19). Issues a-z: No child left
behind. Education Week.
Fisher, C. B., Brunnquell, D. J., Hughes, D. L. Liben, L. S., Maholmes, V., Plattner, S., Susman,
E. J. (2013). Preserving and enhancing the responsible conduct of research involving
children and youth: A response to proposed changes in federal regulations. Social Policy
Report, 27(1), 1-15.
Florida Problem Solving/Response to Intervention Project. (2008). Beliefs survey.
http://www.florida-rti.org/_docs/AppendixA.pdf
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how
valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93-99. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4
Hoppey, D. (2013). Linking action research to response to intervention (RtI): A strategy
implementation project. Networks: An On-line Journal for Teacher Research, 15(1), 110.
Kavale, K. A., & Spaulding, L. S. (2008). Is response to intervention good policy for specific
learning disability? Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23(4), 169-179. doi:
10.1111/j.1540-5826.2008.00274.x
Littman, S. (2010). Response to intervention: raising the achievement of struggling readers.
(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (UMI Number: 3398469)
11
USING MTSS TO RAISE ACHIEVEMENT
12
Mastropieri, M. A. & Scruggs, T. E. (2005). Feasibility and consequences to response to
intervention: Examination of the issues and scientific evidence as a model for the
identification of individuals with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities,
38(6), 525-531.
Matlock, K. L. (2013). The reliability of DIBELS and its effective use as a response to
intervention progress monitoring tool. Journal of Educational Research and Policy
Studies, 13(3), 110-129.
O’Connor, E.P. & Freeman, E.W. (2012). District-level considerations in supporting and
sustaining RtI implementation. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 297-310. doi:
10:1002/pits.21598
Reynolds, C. R., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2009). Response to intervention: Ready or not? Or from
wait-to-fail to watch-them-fail. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 130-145. doi:
10.1037/a0016158
Stringer, E. T. (2014). Action research (4th ed.). Washington, DC : Sage.
Tyre, A. D., Feuerborn, L., Beisse, K., & McCready, C. (2012). Creating readiness for response
to intervention: An evaluation of readiness assessment tools. Contemporary School
Psychology (California Association of School Psychologists), 16(1), 103-114.