Evaluation and
Eligibility Using RTI
Hermiston School District
March 12, 2010
Objective
• Understand the process of evaluating
students using a Response to Intervention
(RTI) framework, from Tier 1 core
instruction through special education
eligibility determination.
Example: Harry
• Harry:
– 2nd grader
– New to the district
– Records indicate no
previous interventions or
major concerns
Example: Harry
Screening
Kindergarten
Fall
Winter
Spring
ISF (Phonemic Awareness)
9
15
LNF
13
29
42
PSF (Phonemic Awareness)
14
29
NWF (Phonic Decoding)
6
13
Instructional Recommendation
Benchmark
Strategic
Strategic
1st Grade
Fall
Winter
Spring
LNF
36
PSF (Phonemic Awareness)
32
36
40
NWF (Phonic Decoding)
15
21
24
3
19
Strategic
Intensive
ORF (Fluency and Accuracy)
Instructional Recommendation
Strategic
Harry: 2nd Grade
• 2nd Grade Fall DIBELS:
2nd grade
Fall
NWF (Phonic Decoding)
32
ORF (Fluency and Accuracy) 27
Instructional
Recommendation
Strategic
• Initial Instructional Placement:
– Core Reading Instruction: 90 minutes w/ Harcourt
– Tier II Intervention: 30 minutes additional phonic
decoding instruction (Phonics for Reading)
Documentation
Student Intervention Profile
Student Name _____________________________________________________________ Date ______________
Grade Level ________ Teacher Name _____________________________________________________________
Initial Data Information
DIBELS
ISF
PSF
NWF
OAKS (RIT)
ORF
Reading
Math
Writing Sample
Ideas
Organization
Sentence
Fluency
Attendance Issues
Behavior Issues
CORE Participation – Harcourt
CORE Instructional Time (actual time block):
Small Group Instruction:
Group Size
Time in Small Group
Teacher in Small Group
Frequency
Notes/Progress:
Additional Interventions
Date Started:
Time of Intervention:
End Date:
Small Group Instruction:
Group Size
Time in Small Group
Teacher in Small Group
Frequency
Curriculum:
Notes/Progress:
Additional Interventions
Time of Intervention:
Curriculum:
Notes/Progress:
Date Started:
End Date:
Small Group Instruction:
Group Size
Time in Small Group
Teacher in Group
Frequency
Conventions
Student Intervention Profile
Student Name __Harry________________________________________________________ Date __ 10/15/09___
Grade Level ___2nd_____ Teacher Name ______Mrs.
Johnson________________________________________
Initial Data Information
DIBELS
ISF
PSF
Attendance Issues
Behavior Issues
OAKS (RIT)
NWF
ORF
32/7
27/78%
Reading
Math
Writing Sample
Ideas
Organization
Sentence
Fluency
Conventions
Harry has good attendance. He has only missed 1 day since the beginning of the
year. Records indicate no attendance concerns at his previous school.
No behavior issues reported. Harry is a hard worker.
CORE Participation – Harcourt
CORE Instructional Time (actual time block):
8:10 – 9:10, 10:30 – 11:00
Small Group Instruction:
Group Size
Time in Small Group
Teacher in Small Group
Frequency
Notes/Progress: Harry receives 90 minutes of core reading instruction daily in his general
education classroom using the Harcourt curriculum. This is taught in a group of 26
students by the classroom teacher. This instruction focuses on phonemic awareness,
phonic decoding, sight words, oral reading fluency, reading comprehension and
vocabulary. Principal walkthroughs indicate the core is being taught with fidelity and all
priority standards are being taught using the core materials.
Additional Interventions
Date Started: 10/19/09
End Date:
Small Group Instruction:
Time of Intervention: 9:10 – 9:40
5 students
30 minutes
30 minutes
5 days per week
Notes/Progress: Harry will receive 30 minutes daily of additional instruction focused on
decoding and identifying sight words. This group will be taught by an instructional
assistant in the Title Room.
Curriculum: Phonics for Reading Level 2
Group Size
Time in Small Group
Teacher in Small Group
Frequency
Progress Monitoring
Phonics for Reading
27
31
30
35
25
32
34
38
35
Notes/Progress:
Additional Interventions
Date Started: 10/19/09
End Date: 12/19/09
Small Group Instruction:
Time of Intervention: 9:10 – 9:40
Group Size 5 students
Curriculum: Phonics for Reading Level 2
Time in Small Group 30 minutes
Teacher in Small Group 30 minutes
Frequency 5 days per week
Notes/Progress: Harry will receive 30 minutes daily of additional instruction focused on
decoding and identifying sight words. This group will be taught by an instructional
assistant in the Title Room.
12/19/09 – Harry has not made sufficient progress in his reading fluency and accuracy. He
is currently reading 35 wcpm with 88% accuracy, and only grew 1 word per week over 8
weeks of intervention. Other students in the intervention grew an average of 1.8 words
per week. Observations of the intervention and teacher checklists indicate 100% of
intervention components implemented with fidelity.
Additional Interventions
Date Started: 1/11/10
End Date:
Small Group Instruction:
Time of Intervention: 9:10 – 9:55
Group Size PFR- 5, RN - 6
Curriculum: Phonics for Reading 2 & Read
Time in Small Group 45 minutes
Naturally
Teacher in Group 45 minutes
Frequency 5 days per week
Notes/Progress: In addition to 30 minutes daily of phonics instruction, Harry will receive 15
minutes daily of Read Naturally focusing on fluency practice and instruction.
Progress Monitoring
Phonics for Reading
& Read Naturally
Phonics for Reading
27
31
30
35
25
32
34
38
35
32
40
41
35
35
42
44
Individual Problem Solving
Understand how to conduct
Problem Solving Meetings
• Purpose
• What data and materials are needed for the
meeting
• Team membership
• Focus of meeting
• Problem Solving Process
•
•
•
•
Define the Problem
Determine an Intervention
Implement the Intervention
Evaluate the Intervention
• Referral
What is the Purpose of Individual
Problem Solving?
• To review information about the student
and possibly gather more information to
better understand their needs
• To develop an individualized intervention
• Through a systematic process
Understand how to conduct
Problem Solving Meetings
• Purpose
• What data and materials are needed for the
meeting
• Team membership
• Focus of meeting
• Problem Solving Process
•
•
•
•
Define the Problem
Determine an Intervention
Implement the Intervention
Evaluate the Intervention
• Referral
Before The Problem Solving
meeting collect the data
1. Complete a file review (Individual Problem
Solving Worksheet)
2. Teacher sets up a pre-meeting with parents,
counselor or school psychologist, and if
appropriate, the ELL teacher.
• Strengths, weaknesses and needs are discussed
• Parents are given the RTI Brochure
• Developmental history and ELL data are collected.
Individual Problem Solving Worksheet
File Review and Problem Identification
Student Name:_______________________________________ Grade: ________ Date: ______________________
Teacher: ______________________ Team Members: _________________________________________________
Attendance Review
Grade
School Year
K
1
2
3
4
5
School Attended
Present
Absent
Days Total
Grand Total # of days present _________ divided by total number of days ________ = % attendance _________
Review of report cards, progress reports, and teacher remarks. Record information below.
Achievement Review - READING
K
1
Benchmark
PSF: 35
NWF: 50
NWF: 25
ORF: 40 – 60
Student
PSF:
NWF:
Score:
NWF:
ORF:
Report Card
Scores:
Other
Information
2
ORF: 90
ORF:
3
ORF: 110
OAKS: 204
ORF:
OAKS:
4
ORF: 118
OAKS: 211
ORF:
OAKS:
5
ORF: 124
OAKS: 218
ORF:
OAKS:
3
OAKS: 205
4
OAKS: 212
5
OAKS: 218
OAKS:
OAKS:
OAKS:
(summary of
teacher concerns,
services received,
etc.)
Achievement Review – MATH
K
Benchmark
1
2
Student
Score:
Report Card
Scores:
Other
Information
(summary of
teacher concerns,
services received,
etc.)
Achievement Review – WRITING
K
Benchmark
1
2
3
4
32 to 39 Min.
5
TTSD RTI Parent Brochure
ODE RTI Parent Form
Understand how to conduct
Problem Solving Meetings
• Purpose
• What data and materials are needed for the
meeting
• Team membership
• Focus of meeting
• Problem Solving Process
•
•
•
•
Define the Problem
Determine an Intervention
Implement the Intervention
Evaluate the Intervention
• Referral
Who is at the Problem Solving
Meeting?
• Literacy Specialist
• Classroom Teacher
• Counselor and/or School
Psychologist
• Parents
• Others as needed (ELL Teacher,
Principal, Special Education
Teacher, School Psychologist,
Speech Pathologist)
TTSD Parent Meeting Notice
Understand how to conduct
Problem Solving Meetings
• Purpose
• What data and materials are needed for the
meeting
• Team membership
• Focus of meeting
• Problem Solving Process
•
•
•
•
Define the Problem
Determine an Intervention
Implement the Intervention
Evaluate the Intervention
• Referral
Problem Solving Meetings are
Solution Focused
• Focus is on:
1. Data
2. Educationally Relevant/Alterable Factors
What changes can WE make that will provide
the best chance of success for the child?
Activity
• Sam, a sixth grader, is not
making sufficient progress.
• With a partner, list all the
possible reasons why Sam may
not be making sufficient
progress.
Variables Related to Student Achievement
Within the student
Alterable
•Desire to learn
•Strategies for learning
•Knowledge
•Skills
•Prior content knowledge
•Self-efficacy/helplessness
•Race
•Genetic potential
Unalterable •Gender
(hard to
•Birth Order
change)
•Disposition
•Health
•Physical difference
•IQ
•Disability category
•Personal history
External to the student
•Quality of instruction
•Pedagogical knowledge
•Content knowledge
•Quality of curriculum
•Quality of learning environment
•Quality of evaluation
•Quality and quantity of time/content
•Family income and resources
•Family housing
•Parent years of schooling
•Mobility
•Members of family
•Family values
•Socioeconomic status
•Family history
Is it alterable?
Is it educationally relevant?
1. Kristin’s DIBELS scores indicate she was in the
“low risk” range last year.
2. Sarah’s file indicates that her parents are
divorced and her father lives in Missouri.
3. The special education director told you that
Erin’s brother receives special education
services.
4. Javon missed 24 days of school last year.
26
Is it alterable?
Is it educationally relevant?
5. Tim tells you he plays video games until late
every night.
6. Pam’s teacher indicated that her noncompliant
behavior began just after winter break.
7. Kathy’s mom told you her dad is in jail for drug
use.
8. Tonya has a diagnosis of Cerebral Palsy.
9. I’ve had all the siblings in that family… I know
what John must be like.
27
Focus on what you can change
Understand how to conduct
Problem Solving Meetings
• Purpose
• What data and materials are needed for the
meeting
• Team membership
• Focus of meeting
• Problem Solving Process
•
•
•
•
Define the problem
Determine an intervention
Implement the intervention
Evaluate the intervention
• Referral
The Problem Solving Model
1. Define the Problem:
• What is the problem and
why is it happening?
30
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a)
Progress Monitoring Data
Progress Monitoring
Phonics for Reading
& Read Naturally
Phonics for Reading
27
31
30
35
25
32
34
38
35
32
40
41
35
35
42
44
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a) Progress Monitoring Data
b) Student Intervention Profile
Notes/Progress:
Additional Interventions
Date Started: 10/19/09
End Date: 12/19/09
Small Group Instruction:
Time of Intervention: 9:10 – 9:40
Group Size 5 students
Curriculum: Phonics for Reading Level 2
Time in Small Group 30 minutes
Teacher in Small Group 30 minutes
Frequency 5 days per week
Notes/Progress: Harry will receive 30 minutes daily of additional instruction focused on
decoding and identifying sight words. This group will be taught by an instructional
assistant in the Title Room.
12/19/09 – Harry has not made sufficient progress in his reading fluency and accuracy. He
is currently reading 35 wcpm with 88% accuracy, and only grew 1 word per week over 8
weeks of intervention. Other students in the intervention grew an average of 1.8 words
per week. Observations of the intervention and teacher checklists indicate 100% of
intervention components implemented with fidelity.
Additional Interventions
Date Started: 1/11/10
End Date: 2/26/10
Small Group Instruction:
Time of Intervention: 9:10 – 9:55
Group Size PFR- 5, RN – 6
Curriculum: Phonics for Reading 2 & Read
Time in Small Group 45 minutes
Naturally
Teacher in Group 45 minutes
Frequency 5 days per week
Notes/Progress: In addition to 30 minutes daily of phonics instruction, Harry will receive 15
minutes daily of Read Naturally focusing on fluency practice and instruction.
2/26/10 – Harry has not made sufficient progress in his reading fluency and accuracy. He
is currently reading 44 wcpm with 89% accuracy, growing 2 wcpm per week. Other
students in the intervention grew an average of 3.5 words per week. Observations and
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a) Progress Monitoring Data
b) Student Intervention Profile
c) File Review Form (Individual Problem Solving Worksheet)
Individual Problem Solving Worksheet
File Review and Problem Identification
Student Name:_______________________________________ Grade: ________ Date: ______________________
Teacher: ______________________ Team Members: _________________________________________________
Attendance Review
Grade
School Year
K
1
2
3
4
5
School Attended
Present
Absent
Days Total
Grand Total # of days present _________ divided by total number of days ________ = % attendance _________
Review of report cards, progress reports, and teacher remarks. Record information below.
Achievement Review - READING
K
1
Benchmark
PSF: 35
NWF: 50
NWF: 25
ORF: 40 – 60
Student
PSF:
NWF:
Score:
NWF:
ORF:
Report Card
Scores:
Other
Information
2
ORF: 90
ORF:
3
ORF: 110
OAKS: 204
ORF:
OAKS:
4
ORF: 118
OAKS: 211
ORF:
OAKS:
5
ORF: 124
OAKS: 218
ORF:
OAKS:
3
OAKS: 205
4
OAKS: 212
5
OAKS: 218
OAKS:
OAKS:
OAKS:
(summary of
teacher concerns,
services received,
etc.)
Achievement Review – MATH
K
Benchmark
1
2
Student
Score:
Report Card
Scores:
Other
Information
(summary of
teacher concerns,
services received,
etc.)
Achievement Review – WRITING
K
Benchmark
1
2
3
4
32 to 39 Min.
5
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a)
b)
c)
d)
Progress Monitoring Data
Student Intervention Profile
File Review Form (Individual Problem Solving Worksheet)
Developmental History
HERMISTON SCHOOL DISTRICT #8R
Developmental History
(A questionnaire for school planning)
Date_____________________________________
Name of Student________________________________________________________________________________Sex: M F
Last
First
MI
Address____________________________________________________________________________Zip Code____________
Home Phone_____________________
Work Phone_____________________
School___________________________
Date of Birth_____/____/_____
Month Day Year
Grade____
Teacher____________________
Age______/_______
Years
Months
Language _________________/__________________
Child
Home
Questionnaire Completed by________________________________ Relationship____________________________
Informant_______________________________________________Relationship____________________________
Name (if different from above)
Family:
Adult with whom the child is living:
Natural Mother
Natural Father
Stepmother
Stepfather
Adoptive Mother
Adoptive Father
Foster Mother
Foster Father
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
How
How
How
How
How
How
How
How
long
long
long
long
long
long
long
long
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
Other (Specify) _____________________________________________________________________________
Parent’s Name ________________________________________________________________________
Address _________________________________________________________________
Circle highest grade completed in school
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Age __________
Zip Code ____________
College 1 2 3 4
Ages of children in family – first born to last
1._______________________________________M F Age____
4.____________________________________M F Age____
2._______________________________________M F Age____
5.____________________________________M F Age____
3._______________________________________M F Age____
6.____________________________________M F Age____
Number of children at home______________________________________________________________________________
Describe how other children get along in school____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Do other members of the family have similar problems? ______________________________________________________
CIRCLE ONE
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
Has the child ever lived with someone or been in foster care for a period of time? If yes, explain: _________
______________________________________________________________________________________
Has either parent or any of the children had a problem (chronic major illness, mental illness, alcoholism, major
surgery, unemployment, imprisonment, etc.) which may relate to the child’s problems? If yes, explain______
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Have there been any major family incidents or tragedies (deaths, rapes, pregnancies) which may be related to
the child’s problems? If yes, explain_________________________________________________________
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Progress Monitoring Data
Student Intervention Profile
File Review Form (Individual Problem Solving Worksheet)
Developmental History
ELL Data
ELL Data
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Progress Monitoring Data
Student Intervention Profile
File Review Form (Individual Problem Solving Worksheet)
Developmental History
ELL Data
Cohort Data
Cohort Data
60
50
40
Isaiah
Aimline
Mary
30
Amy
20
10
Chase
Dec.
Scores
Jan.
Scores
Feb.
Scores
March
Scores
April
Scores
May
Scores
June
Scores
42
Cohort Data
60
50
40
Aimline
30
20
Amy
Isaiah
10
Chase
Mary
Dec.
Scores
Jan.
Scores
Feb.
Scores
March
Scores
April
Scores
May
Scores
June
Scores
43
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Progress Monitoring Data
Student Intervention Profile
File Review Form (Individual Problem Solving Worksheet)
Developmental History
ELL Data
Cohort Data
2. Consider if other data is needed
Additional data: ICEL & RIOT
• Instruction: How content
is taught
• Curriculum: What
content is taught
• Environment:
Accommodations,
modifications, & other
environmental
considerations
• Learner: Things specific
to the student
• Review: existing
LEAST TO
MOST
INTRUSIVE
information
• Interview: parents,
teachers, student
• Observe: student during
instruction
• Test: student skills
DIRECT TO
INDIRECT
Multiple Sources and Domains
Goal: Convergent Data from Multiple Sources
Why the problem is
occurring
ICEL
Assessing the Learner
• Use diagnostic data (as necessary) to
further define the problem.
Additional Diagnostic Data
• The major purpose for
administering diagnostic tests is to
provide information that is
useful in planning more effective
instruction.
• Diagnostic tests should only be
given when there is a clear
expectation that they will provide
new information about a child’s
difficulties learning to read that can
be used to provide more focused,
or more powerful instruction.
Diagnostic Assessment Questions
“Why is the student not performing at the
expected level?”
(Defining the Problem)
“What is the student’s instructional need?”
(Designing an Intervention)
Digging Deeper
• In order to be “diagnostic”
– Teachers need to know the sequence of skill
development
– Content knowledge may need further
development
Enabling Skills
• Enabling skills are skills that could be considered
prerequisite skills for the demonstration of
proficient performances on larger assessments
measures
• They represent the sub-skills of higher order
performance demonstration
• Deficiencies in enabling skills will often result in
lower performance on assessments
Phonemic Awareness
Developmental Continuum
Hard
• Phoneme deletion and manipulation
• Blending and segmenting individual
•
•
•
•
•
Easy
phonemes
Onset-rime blending and segmentation
Syllable segmentation and blending
Sentence segmentation
Rhyming
Word comparison
THEN check
here!
Diagnostic Assessments
•
•
•
•
•
Quick Phonics Screener (Jan Hasbrouck)
Digging Deeper (Wendy Robinson)
CORE Multiple Measures
Error Analysis
Curriculum-Based Evaluation Procedures
(Ken Howell)
Digging Deeper Questions
Core Multiple Measures
Error Analysis
1. Select a 250 word passage on which you
estimate that the student will be 80-85%
accurate.
2. Record the student’s errors on your copy of the
reading probe.
3. Use at least 25 errors for students in grade 1 to
conduct an error analysis and at least 50 errors
for students in second grade and above.
4. Use an error analysis sheet to conduct error
analysis.
Error Analysis
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Progress Monitoring Data
Student Intervention Profile
File Review Form (Individual Problem Solving Worksheet)
Developmental History
ELL Data
Cohort Data
2. Consider if other data is needed
3. Define the Problem
Problem Definition
1. Objective – observable and measurable
2. Clear – passes “the stranger test”
3. Complete – includes examples (and nonexamples when necessary) and baseline data
Problem Definition
Example
Non-Example
• Harry (2nd grader) is currently
reading a median of 44 words
correct per minute (wcpm)
with 89% accuracy when given
2nd grade level text. He also
answers an average of 3/10
comp questions correct on
weekly in-class tests. 2nd grade
students in his school are
reading an average of 85
wcpm on 2nd grade text and
answering 9/10 comp
questions correct.
• Harry struggles with
being a fluent reader and
is not meeting the 2nd
grade reading
benchmark. He makes a
lot of mistakes and is
currently reading at a 1st
grade level. He also has
difficulties answering
comprehension questions
at grade level.
Define the problem
1. Review Data paying attention to the individual student’s
needs
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Progress Monitoring Data
Student Intervention Profile
File Review Form (Individual Problem Solving Worksheet)
Developmental History
ELL Data
Cohort Data
2. Consider if other data is needed
3. Define the Problem
4. As a team, develop a hypothesis and create a plan
(Individual Student Action Plan)
Individual Student Action Plan
Student Name:_______________________________________ Grade: ________ Date: ______________________
Teacher: ______________________ Team Members: _________________________________________________
To be completed by the LIT BLOCK team: Develop a hypothesis based on the evidence from the individual
problem solving worksheet, addressing the questions below:
1. Does the evidence support that the student’s problems may be primarily due to problem with attention,
motivation, or other behavioral difficulty? Indicate next steps.
2, Does evidence support that the student’s problems may be primarily due to attendance problems, or
frequency school interruptions? If so, indicate reasons for absences and interruptions. Indicate next steps.
3. Does evidence support that the student’s problems may be primarily due to other concerns like trauma, family
concerns, or other disabilities? Describe. Be sure to note when these issues occurred and their correlations with
any academic concerns.
4. Does evidence suggest the student may have a learning disability? Indicate next steps.
INDIVIDUAL INTERVENTION PLAN:
Program(s):
Case Manager
Number in group
Time
Frequency
Next meeting date to check progress:
Example: Hypothesis
Development
Problem Definition: Harry (2nd grader) is
currently reading a median of 44 words
correct per minute (wcpm) with 89%
accuracy when given 2nd grade level text.
He also answers an average of 3/10 comp
questions correct on weekly in-class tests.
2nd grade students in his school are
reading an average of 85 wcpm on 2nd
grade text and answering 9/10 comp
questions correct.
Hypothesis Development
Instruction:
Curriculum:
Environment:
Learner:
Core: large group guided practice ,
choral reading, and opportunities for
partner reading.
Intervention: teacher model-lead-test
format for teaching simple decodable
words and word lists, fluency practice
Harry’s core is taught in a large group
of 25 students. He tends to echo read
during more difficult choral readings
and waits for other students to say the
word. He never raises his hand to
volunteer to read.
Intervention group: 5-6 students in
quiet corner of room. Very engaged
Core: 90 min/day of Harcourt with
focus on decoding, fluency,
comprehension, and vocabulary
Intervention: 30 min day of Phonics for
Reading, 15 min/day of Read Naturally
ORF: 44 wcpm with 89% accuracy
Weekly comp questions: 3/10
Phonics Screener: Passed all levels
except Silent e words (3/10),
consonant digraphs (2/10) and rcontrolled vowels (1/10)
Listening comp: avg 9/10 correct on
monthly tests.
Hypothesis Development
• Data-Based Hypothesis:
– Harry’s reading fluency and comprehension
problems occur because he does not have
strategies for decoding consonant digraphs
(ch, sh, etc), silent-e words, and r-controlled
vowels (ar, ir, er, or). His fluency and
comprehension will improve if he receives
additional intensive instruction in these
decoding strategies.
Discussion
• In a small group, discuss how Defining the
Problem and Developing a Hypothesis in
Individual Problem Solving is different
than “pre-referral” meetings.
The Problem Solving Model
1. Define the Problem:
• What is the problem and
why is it happening?
2. Design Intervention:
• What are we going to do
about the problem?
70
Intervention Development
• Goal setting:
– Measurable
– Able to be Monitored
Moves
– Meaningful
Harry from intensive to strategic
AND
3 wcpm per week growth
By June 9, 2010 when given a 2nd grade
level DIBELS passage, Harry will read
80 wcpm with 95% accuracy.
Goal Setting:
Things to Consider
1. What is the goal?
1.
Criterion context
•
2.
Research-based benchmarks/proficiency
Normative context
•
Minimum of 25th percentile (bottom limit of average)
2. By when?
–
–
Long term goals set at the proficiency standard
Short term goals set for incremental step towards proficiency
3. What growth can we reasonably expect?
– National Growth rates (Fuchs, AIMSWEB, Hasbrouck & Tindal)
– District Growth rates
– Cohort growth rates
Goal Setting Tips
• Grade Level vs. Instructional Level
– If student is accurate (>95%) on grade level,
monitor at grade level
– When in doubt, monitor at the higher level
• When a student reaches the 50th %ile on
instructional level, consider moving up a
monitoring level (Shapiro, 2008)
• ABC
– Always Be Closing (the gap)
Individual Student Action Plan
Student Name:_______________________________________ Grade: ________ Date: ______________________
Teacher: ______________________ Team Members: _________________________________________________
To be completed by the LIT BLOCK team: Develop a hypothesis based on the evidence from the individual
problem solving worksheet, addressing the questions below:
1. Does the evidence support that the student’s problems may be primarily due to problem with attention,
motivation, or other behavioral difficulty? Indicate next steps.
2, Does evidence support that the student’s problems may be primarily due to attendance problems, or
frequency school interruptions? If so, indicate reasons for absences and interruptions. Indicate next steps.
3. Does evidence support that the student’s problems may be primarily due to other concerns like trauma, family
concerns, or other disabilities? Describe. Be sure to note when these issues occurred and their correlations with
any academic concerns.
4. Does evidence suggest the student may have a learning disability? Indicate next steps.
INDIVIDUAL INTERVENTION PLAN:
Program(s):
Case Manager
Number in group
Time
Frequency
Next meeting date to check progress:
Student Intervention Profile (cont)
Additional Interventions
Date Started: 1/11/10
End Date: 2/26/10
Small
Group
Instruction:
Time of Intervention: 9:10 – 9:55
Group Size PFR- 5, RN - 6
Curriculum: Phonics for Reading 2 & Read
Time in Small Group 45 minutes
Naturally
Teacher in Group 45 minutes
Frequency 5 days per week
Notes/Progress: In addition to 30 minutes daily of phonics instruction, Harry will receive 15
minutes daily of Read Naturally focusing on fluency practice and instruction.
2/26/10 – Harry has not made sufficient progress in his reading fluency and accuracy. He
is currently reading 44 wcpm with 89% accuracy, growing 2 wcpm per week. Other
students in the intervention grew an average of 3.5 words per week. Observations and
teacher checklists indicate that an average of 95% of intervention components were
implemented with fidelity. Harry will be referred to the problem solving team to develop
an individualized intervention.
Additional Interventions
Date Started: 3/1/10
End Date:
Time of Intervention: 9:10 – 9:55, 1:15 – 1:45 Small Group Instruction:
PFR- 5,3 RN - 6
Curriculum: Phonics for Reading 2 & Read
75 minutes
Naturally
75 minutes
5 days per week
Notes/Progress: Harry will receive the following interventions: 30 minutes of Phonics for
Reading every morning for 30 minutes focusing on decoding and sight words, in a group of
5 students; 15 minutes of Read Naturally every morning focusing on reading fluency in
decodable text in a group of 6 students; An additional 30 minutes of Phonics for Reading
every afternoon in a smaller group of 3 students (double dose). This period will focus on
providing added practice with difficult decoding skills from the previous lessons and
completing additional lessons.
Group Size
Time in Small Group
Teacher in Group
Frequency
Discussion
• In a small group, discuss how Designing
an Intervention at the Individual
Problem Solving Meeting is different
than “pre-referral” meetings.
The Problem Solving Model
1. Define the Problem:
• What is the problem and
why is it happening?
2. Design Intervention:
• What are we going to do
about the problem?
3. Implement and Monitor:
• Are we doing what we
intended to do?
77
Implement the Intervention
Harry’s intervention:
• 60 minutes daily of Phonics for Reading,
focusing on silent-e words, consonant
digraphs and r-controlled vowels,
provided in a 30-minute block of 5
students and an additional 30-minute
block of 3 students, 5x/week.
• 15 minutes 5x/week of Read Naturally in
a group of 6 students.
Fidelity of Implementation
• Fidelity to curriculum
– All lesson parts taught following outlined procedures
– Curriculum decision rules followed (lesson checkouts,
mastery tests, etc)
• Fidelity to research-based instructional
procedures
– High pacing (high rate of student opportunities to
respond)
– Corrective feedback
– Behavior management system evident
– Students are accurate before moving on to new material
The Problem Solving Model
1. Define the Problem:
• What is the problem and
why is it happening?
2. Design Intervention:
• What are we going to do
about the problem?
3. Implement and Monitor:
• Are we doing what we
intended to do?
4. Evaluate Effectiveness:
• Did our plan work?
81
Evaluate the intervention
Determine how effective the intervention
was for the student
• Progress monitoring data
• Fidelity Data
• Cohort Data
Progress Monitoring
Phonics for Reading Double dose PFR &
Read Naturally
& Read Naturally
Phonics for Reading
27
31
30
35
25
32
34
38
35
32
40
41
35
35
42
44
45
51
55
59
60
58
Fidelity Data
• Based on observations of the
intervention conducted on 3/10/10,
3/17/10 and 4/16/10, an average of 95%
of intervention components were
implemented with fidelity with a
minimum of 90% implementation.
How did the intervention work?
What if the intervention doesn’t
work?
SPED Referral
• If student continues to have low skills and slow
progress after at least ___ weeks of individualized
intervention (see decision rules), the student is
automatically referred for Special Education
Evaluation.
• The following data is compiled and provided as
part of the SPED referral:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Individual Problem Solving Worksheet
Student Intervention Profile
Progress Monitoring Data
Individual Student Action Plan
Developmental History
ELL Language Data (ELL checklist)
LD Eligibility Evaluation Steps
• Referral for a special education evaluation
• Evaluation planning
• Prior Notice About Evaluation/Consent for
Evaluation
• Evaluation (60 school days)
• Evaluation Summary Report
• Eligibility Determination meeting
SPED Referral
• Typically made by the RTI team
• Parents may make a referral at any time
• If another disability is suspected, proceed to
referral while intervening
• Remember: Referral does not equal evaluation.
Once a student is referred, the evaluation planning
team (including the parents) convene to determine
if an evaluation is appropriate. Before the meeting,
parents receive procedural safeguards. At the end
of the meeting, parents receive prior notice of the
team’s decision.
OAR’s: Notice and Consent
(a) Before conducting any evaluation or reevaluation, the
public agency must provide notice to the parent in
accordance with OAR 581-015-2310 that describes any
evaluation procedures the agency proposes to conduct
as a result of the evaluation planning process.
(b) Before conducting any evaluation or reevaluation, the
public agency must obtain informed written consent for
evaluation in accordance with OAR 581-015-2090 and
581-015-2095.
(c) If the public agency refuses an evaluation or
reevaluation requested by the parent, the public agency
must provide the parent with prior written notice under
OAR 581-015-2310.
Evaluation
Identifying
Learning
Disabilities Under
an RTI Model
Dual Discrepancy
• Low achievement and
Slow Progress (despite
intensive interventions) are
the foundation for
determining SLD eligibility
using RTI.
• Also must consider
Instructional Need.
1. Does the Student Have
Significantly Low Skills?
• Determine parameters
– Differentiate low from significantly low
• Below 16th %ile
• 2 times discrepant
• Standard score below 85
• Maintain consistency
– Between schools, grades, and children
• Significantly low on multiple measures as
compared to multiple groups
2. Is Progress Slow?
• How much is enough?
•
•
•
•
Progress monitoring growth rates
Yearly RIT gains
Where is the goal set?
Use your decision rules
• Context is key
• Typical growth
• National norms
• District norms
• Cohort growth
Is the Intervention Intensive?
• Scientific, research-based (IDEA 2004)
• Sufficient frequency and duration
• Implemented with fidelity
Eligibility Decision Making
It comes down to
the balance. How
does the “weight” of
the intervention
compare to the
“weight” of
progress?
3. Instructional Need
• Students need to receive the intensive
instruction in order to make adequate
progress.
– Need to describe the instruction in either it’s
content, methodology, and/or delivery
– Review progress data in relation to intervention
strategies implemented
Note… special education is not remedial
education.
Avoid Exclusionary Factors
• Lack of appropriate instruction
• Existence of another disability
• Limited English proficiency
• Environmental or Economic Disadvantage
LD Evaluation Report :
Background Info
State SLD Eligibility Form
TTSD LD Report Template
Section 1: Background Information (written by learning specialist or school psychologist)
•Reason for the referral (state areas of concern and disability/disabilities suspected)
•Previous testing
•History in special programs (special education, Title I, ELL, 504)
•Parent concerns and perspective, including background of disabilities, especially in areas related
to current difficulties
LD Evaluation Report :
1. Significantly Low Skills
State SLD Eligibility Form
LD Evaluation Report :
1. Significantly Low Skills
TTSD LD Report Template
Section 2: Students who qualify for special education as having learning
disabilities have very low skills relative to expectations for the student’s age, or
relative to the student’s progress toward Oregon achievement.
•Review existing information including teacher collected work samples
•Complete tables and analyze assessment results
•Summarize actual growth to expected growth and student scores to average scores
•Analyze historical data:
•Have scores always been low? If not, a learning disability is unlikely.
•Are scores relatively low? Has the student had intensive assistance to maintain skills at that level?
•Are the state/district assessments and individual achievement tests consistent? If not, get one more
piece of information about the skills in question. Confirm results with reports from teachers, which
must be consistent.
•If inconsistent results are reported, decide which is valid and justify the decision. Consider the
demands of each assessment (content, speed, fluency). Lower scores may be considered valid if
they reflect performance on a test that is more comprehensive or involves more complex demands
than other assessments used.
•Finish with a summary statement about the student’s skills.
1. Significantly Low Skills:
General Guidelines
1.
Low Skills:
– Actual level of performance is significantly below
expected level of performance (on multiple
measures)
• DIBELS scores
• Curriculum-Based Measurement (CBM) scores for math, reading,
writing
• OAKS percentile ranks
• Other standardized test scores (WJ, WIAT, GRADE, etc) percentile
ranks
…as compared to expected level
LD Evaluation Report :
Observation
State SLD Eligibility Form
TTSD LD Report Template
Section 4: The student’s academic performance and behavior were observed
in a regular classroom setting.
•Observation must occur in area of concern
•Note relevant behavior and its relationship to academic functioning
LD Evaluation Report :
2. Slow Progress… Despite Interventions
State SLD Eligibility Form: Slow Progress…
State SLD Eligibility Form:
…Despite Intensive Interventions
LD Evaluation Report :
2. Slow Progress… Despite Interventions
TTSD LD Report Template
Section 3: Students with learning disabilities have academic skill deficits that are
resistant to well-planned and implemented research based interventions that were
designed to increase the child’s rate of learning.
•Report baseline scores and how those scores compare to the general population
•Describe each intervention and any changes or modifications
•Describe fidelity of interventions (dates of observation, met __ % of fidelity checklist
criteria)
•Analyze progress, compare to general population and intervention cohort
•Finish with summary statement and recommendations for future instruction (the student
responded well to specific, contingent praise, sticker reinforcers, etc.)
2. Slow Progress:
General Guidelines
2.
Slow Progress (despite research-based instruction
and interventions matched to student need)
– Baseline level of performance…
– Ending level of performance…
– Growth rates…
…as compared to expected level
– Description of decision-making based on
district decision rules
2. Slow Progress:
General Guidelines
2.
Slow Progress (cont)
– Summary of each level of instruction/intervention
(could include):
•
•
•
•
Curriculum used
Brief description of skills addressed
# of weeks/months implemented; days per week, min per day
Group size
– Fidelity of implementation data:
• e.g. Observations of the Phonics for Reading intervention on
10/16/09, 11/2/09, and 11/17/09 indicate that an average of
97% of intervention components were implemented with
fidelity.
3. Instructional Need:
General Guidelines
3.
Instructional Need
– Summary of why the student requires specially designed
instruction in order to make progress towards the district
standards and benchmarks
• Examples:
“Progress monitoring data indicate that Amy requires direct,
explicit phonics instruction in a small group of no more than 4-5
students in order to make sufficient progress towards reading
benchmarks.”
“Data indicates that Scott only made significant progress to catch
him up to his typical peers when provided with small group
instruction focusing on number sense activities. This instruction
was provided for 30 minutes for 5 days per week, in addition to his
60 minutes of Core math instruction. Without this additional
support, Scott made no progress towards catching up to his peers.”
State SLD Eligibility Form:
Additional Sections If Necessary
TTSD Evaluation Report Template:
Exclusionary Factors
•
Section 5: The student has been provided the opportunity to learn the
skills.
• Describe the student’s instructional stability and reasons for excessive
absences
• Describe core instruction in the area of concern (amount, intensity,
training of instructor, size of group
•
Section 6: The student does not have another disability or sensory
problem.
• Report current vision and hearing
• Report historical medical concerns or suspected disabilities
• Report results of outside evaluations or medical diagnoses
• Report results of FBAs, Conners, language assessments, etc.
• Explain the decision if the team decided not to evaluate those areas
• If an IQ test was given, note statistically unusual performance
TTSD Evaluation Report Template:
Exclusionary Factors
•
Section 7: The student’s problem is not the result of cultural factors or
environmental or economic disadvantage.
• Describe the student’s educational history, including preschool and
enrichment opportunities
• Describe pertinent information about family literacy levels
• Describe pertinent information about family stressors such as moves,
homelessness, divorce, employment, family illness, etc.
•
Section 8: The student’s problem is not the result of limited English
proficiency. (written by English Language Learner Specialist)
• The student’s English language acquisition may be characterized as . . .
• The other student’s in his/her group are progressing in English at . . .
• The student’s reading/written language/math progress is
predictable/unpredictable given his/her language, culture and
educational experience. (Explain)
Eligibility Determination
Eligibility Determination
Eligibility Determination
Emily
• 1st Grader
• Winter ORF: 5
• Gain: 6-10 wpm in 8
weeks
• Other students gain
22 wpm in the same
period of time
• Core program
• +45 minutes of
decoding and
fluency program
Ellie
• 3rd grader
• 25thth percentile on
ORF
• Remains at 25th
percentile
• “Low average”
• Core program
• 20 minutes/day
additional practice
• 40 minutes/day
explicit instruction
and guided practice
Johanna
• 2nd grader
• Reads 45 words per
minute (target is 90
wpm)
• Core program
• +45 minutes
additional Reading
Mastery
• New to the district
• Has been in 4
different school
districts
• Recently moved in
with a relative
Natasha
• 5th grader
• Reads 77 words per minute
(target is 124 wpm)
• Scores below average
benchmark on the State-wide
assessment
• Core reading program
• 30 minutes of Corrective
Reading 5x a week
• Natasha was adopted
from Russia 2 years ago
• ELL teacher interviews
family and finds out she
didn’t attend school
before she came the
U.S.
Marisol
• 3rd grader
• Reads 45 words per
minute in Spanish
• Reads 5 words per
minute in English
• Core Spanish reading
program
• Additional interventions in
Spanish 5x a week since
1st grade
• Has been in the same
school since Kindergarten
• The other students in her
cohort group read an
average of 90 wpm in
Spanish and English
Eligibility Determination meeting
• Held within 60 school days of receiving
parental consent.
• The team, including the parents, decides if
the student is eligible for special education
services; NOT individuals.
Questions/Comments