DEVELOPING STATE,
DISTRICT OR SCHOOL-LEVEL
RTI COLLABORATIONS FOR
ACADEMICS AND BEHAVIOR
Heather Peshak George, Ph.D.
Brian Gaunt, Ph.D.
Objectives
• Understand the complexity of integrating
academic and behavioral systems
• Articulate the need for efficient problem-solving
and resource allocation across state, district
and building levels
• Become familiar with the organizational
foundations and core components to an
integrated multi-tiered system of supports
• Understand various practices and strategies
available for efficient and effective scale-up of
RtI
MTSS: Integrating Two Evidence-Based Models to Improve
the Academic and Behavior Outcomes for ALL Students
• Challenging Times In Which to Educate
America’s Children and Youth
Performance Evaluations Tied to Student Growth
Economic Crises
Alternatives to Public K-12 Education
AYP Projections and Expectations
Recruitment and Retention of Qualified
Professionals
– Common Language/Common Understanding with
Educators, Parents and the Community
–
–
–
–
–
Current Initiatives
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Differentiated Accountability (DA)
District Improvement and Assessment Plan (DIAP)
School Improvement Plan (SIP)
Positive Behavior Supports (FL-PBS)
Response to Intervention (FL PS/RtI)
NCLB & IDEIA
Race to the Top (RTTT)
Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR) & Florida
Center for Research – Science, Technology &
Mathematics (FCR-STEM)
Before adding one more thing….
www.safetycenter.navy.mil
5
Strategies for Successfully
Addressing these Challenges
Anticipate the Future
Use of Highly Effective Practices
Efficient Delivery of those Practices
Data to Evidence Effectiveness of Practices
Strong Professional Development and Support
to Sustain Effective Practices
• Communicating Clearly and Frequently with
Stakeholders
• Use Framework to Integrate Common Elements
of Diverse Initiatives.
•
•
•
•
•
The Future:
Re-Authorization of ESEA
• Data-Based Problem-Solving (MTSS)
– Learn Act (Literacy) S. 929IS
• (x) applying the principles of universal design for learning;
• (xi) using age-appropriate screening assessments, diagnostic
assessments, formative assessments, and summative assessments
to identify individual learning needs, to inform instruction, and to
monitor-– (I) student progress and the effects of instruction over time
• (xv) using strategies to enhance children's-– (I) motivation to communicate, read, and write; and
– (II) engagement in self-directed learning
– Blueprint for Reform 2010
• "Instead of labeling failures, we will reward success. Instead of a
single snapshot, we will recognize progress and growth. And instead
of investing in the status quo, we must reform our schools to
accelerate student achievement, close achievement gaps..."
Senate Bill 541
• Achievement through Prevention Act (PBIS)
– “The Achievement Through Prevention Act provides
support for states, local educational agencies and
schools to increase implementation of school-wide
positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS)
and early intervening services. This bill promises to
improve student academic achievement and to reduce
disciplinary problems in schools while improving
coordination with similar activities and services provided
under the federal special education law.”
Highly Effective Practices:
Research
• High quality academic instruction (e.g., content matched to student
success level, frequent opportunity to respond, frequent feedback) by
itself can reduce problem behavior (Filter & Horner, 2009; Preciado,
Horner, Scott, & Baker, 2009, Sanford, 2006)
• Implementation of school-wide positive behavior support leads to
increased academic engaged time and enhanced academic outcomes
(Algozzine & Algozzine, 2007; Horner et al., 2009; Lassen, Steele, &
Sailor, 2006)
• “Viewed as outcomes, achievement and behavior are related; viewed as
causes of the other, achievement and behavior are unrelated.
(Algozzine, et al., 2011)
• Children who fall behind academically will be more likely to find
academic work aversive and also find escape-maintained problem
behaviors reinforcing (McIntosh, 2008; McIntosh, Sadler, & Brown,
2010)
9
Cycle of Academic and Behavioral Failure:
Aggressive Response
(McIntosh, 2008)
Teacher presents
student with grade
level academic task
So, which is it…
Academic problems
lead to behavior
Not sure…
problems?
Student engages
Student’s academic
Probably
a combination
of bothin problem
skills do not
improve
or
behavior
Behavior problems lead to academic
problems?
Student escapes
academic task
Teacher removes
academic task or
removes student
10
School-wide Behavior & Reading Support
The integration/combination of the two:
• are critical for school success
• utilize the three tiered prevention model
• incorporate a team approach at school level,
grade level, and individual level
• share the critical feature of data-based decision
making
• produce larger gains in literacy skills than the
reading-only model
(Stewart, Benner, Martella, & Marchand-Martella, 2007)
11
Historical Perspective
• PS/RTI has piloted 30+ schools and 7
districts in developing district and schoolbased MTSS across all three tiers.
• FLPBS has supported over 1100 schools
and 52 districts to implement Tier 1 PBS and
~300 schools to implement Tier 2 PBS.
• PS/RtI has participated in the DA Process by
supporting 5 RtI Specialists to be part of the
DA teams
Collaboration
• Approximately 2 years ago, leadership in
both projects and from DOE began to
discuss the commonalities and collaboration
of the two projects.
• The formal collaboration between projects
began last year and was reflected in shared
trainings, work groups, and similar action
steps in RFAs.
January 2011: 52/67 Districts = 78% of the State!
Scaling Up Together!
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Alachua
Baker
Bay
Bradford
Brevard
Charlotte
Citrus
Collier
Gadsden
Gilchrist
Glades
Hamilton
Hardee
Hendry
Hernando
Jackson
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lee
Levy
Madison
Manatee
Marion
Martin
Miami-Dade
Monroe
Okeechobee
Pasco
Pinellas
Polk
Santa Rosa
St. Johns
Taylor
Walton
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Calhoun
Escambia
Flagler
Franklin
Gulf
Highlands
Hillsborough
Indian River
Jefferson
Lake
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
88% of Florida School Districts
BOTH:
48% (32/67)
Leon
Liberty
Osceola
Putnam
Sarasota
Seminole
St. Lucie
Sumter
Union
Wakulla
PBS Only:
30% (20/67)
•
•
•
•
Broward
Clay
Duval
Holmes
•
•
•
RtI Only:
10% (7/67)
Palm Beach
Suwannee
Volusia
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Columbia
De Soto
Dixie
Okaloosa
Lafayette
Nassau
Orange
Washington
Neither:12
% (8/67)
Context
+
_______________________________________________________________________
=
Efficient Delivery of
Highly Effective Practices
• Statewide District Needs Assessment Results:
– Integrate Practices to Reduce Duplication, Increase
Effective Use of Personnel and Provide Greater
Support for Instruction Less is More.
– Focus Resource Development and District
Resources On:
Evidence-based Coaching Strategies
Leadership Skills to Support MTSS
Family and Community Engagement
Aligning PK-12 Alignment
Evaluation Models to Demonstrate Outcomes
Common Language/Common Understanding Around an
Integrated Data-Based Problem-Solving Process
– Integrating Technology and Universal Design for Learning
–
–
–
–
–
–
Big Idea!
• We need to model a collaborative, integrated
Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS)
process at the state level so that we can
advocate for it at the district and school
level.
• We need a common language and common
understanding!
Mission and Vision
Multi-Tiered System of Student Supports - Inter-Project Collaborative
The collaborative vision of the Florida Problem-Solving/Response to
Intervention (FL PS/RtI) and the Florida Positive Behavior
Support/Response to Intervention for Behavior (FLPBS/RtI:B) Projects
is to:
• Enhance the capacity of all Florida school districts to successfully
implement and sustain a multi-tiered system of student supports
with fidelity in every school;
• Accelerate and maximize student academic and social-emotional
outcomes through the application of data-based problem solving
utilized by effective leadership at all levels of the educational
system;
• Inform the development, implementation, and ongoing evaluation
of an integrated, aligned, and sustainable system of service
delivery that prepares all students for post-secondary education
and/or successful employment within our global society.
Translating Mission to Motion
• Created Leadership Team – Leadership Team
became STT in function
• Created workgroups to develop vision and resources:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Leadership
Coaching
DBPS
Evaluation
PK-12 Alignment
Family and Community Engagement
Sub Leadership team – protocol and logistics
Technology?
Translating Mission to Motion
• Core values of the workgroups:
– Work group formed by ILT
– Each work group operates off an approved proposal of
activities
– Minutes kept of all meetings
– Each group reports out to ILT
– Workgroups charged with:
• Exploring research in area
• Developing conceptual framework
• Proposing the scope of activities
• Developing content/products/etc.
– Workgroups are not the technical assistance and support
providers
– ILT determines how materials, products, trainings are delivered
Work Group Proposal
• Required by each work group before
approved by ILT
– Topic identified by ILT
– Facilitator and members
– General purpose
– How does it relate to the grant deliverables
– What are the anticipated outcomes for 2011
Leadership Team Workgroup
• To provide a framework for educational
leadership comprised of those leadership
skills and practices contributing to
successful and sustained system reform
leading to improved instructional practices
and student outcomes.
Evidence-based Definition
Effective district leadership is evidenced by teams or individuals who:
• Establish and articulate a clear vision with a sense of urgency for change,
maintain focus and deliver a consistent message of implementation over
time
• Focus on schools (districts are successful when schools are successful)
• Create relationships with stakeholders based upon mutual respect and
shared responsibility
• Engage in expert problem solving
– Identify the correct barriers and goals efficiently and effectively
– Engage in good problem analysis with an understanding that there are many
typical barriers to attaining school goals.
– Know that there are several identified strategies for removing barriers and
achieving the vision and apply appropriate strategies based upon school-specific
needs
– Evaluate the effectiveness of implemented strategies
• Invest in professional development
(Leithwood, 2010; Barnhardt, 2009; Crawford & Torgeson, 2007)
Coaching Workgroup
• Develop a working model of Coaching Functions
that addresses the core
skills/competencies/and knowledge sets
needed to lead/support/and evaluate
implementation and sustainability of the MTSS
model in schools/districts.
• The Coaching model will be created specifically
for use by district leadership teams to enhance
capacity of their schools to support the MTSS
initiative. Therefore, district level personnel will
be the target audience for use of the Coaching
model.
Coaching Domains
Professional Development
Leadership Support
Problem-Solving
Facilitation Skills
Content
Knowledge
Coaching Responsibilities
1) Demonstrate effective interpersonal communication skills
2) Use multiple types and sources of data to answer a variety of
problem-solving questions
3) Disseminate evidence-based content knowledge
a. Organizational Change/Implementation Process
b. Integrated MTSSS Three-Tiered Model
c. Best Practices in Reading, Math, Behavior Instruction
d. Involving culturally diverse families and community partners
4) Facilitate team-based collaborative problem solving with all
stakeholders
5) Support capacity of leadership team and staff to implement &
sustain a MTSSS
6) Provide professional development training and technical
assistance
7) Evaluate the impact of coaching activities and supports
DBPS Workgroup
• Develop a model/template for data-based
decision-making at the entire school, group
of student or individual student levels that
can be applied by schools and districts. The
primary outcome will be the development of
the conceptual framework, training
resources, and exemplars that will be used
for professional development at the district
level.
Program Evaluation Workgroup
• To develop an integrated program evaluation model
for academic and behavior domains. The model will
be driven by evaluation questions derived from the
literature and other data sources (e.g., Projects’
program evaluation data) on implementing and
evaluating multi-tiered systems of support for
students (MTSS).
• The model will have applications at all levels of the
educational system (e.g., school-, district-, and statelevels) and result in data that can be used by
multiple stakeholders (e.g., Projects’ staff, State
Transformation Team, district and school leadership
teams) to inform decision-making.
Pre-K Alignment Workgroup
• Develop district and school capacity for RtI implementation
through the development of a state-wide PK-12 Alignment model
that enables efficiency of a district-wide scale-up of a multi-tiered
system of support (MTSS). The mission of the PK-12 Alignment
Workgroup is to ensure alignment between the activities
conducted within the Secondary Pilot and the other workgroups
(i.e., Coaching, Program Evaluation, Family & Community
Engagement, Data-Based Problem-Solving, and Leadership). The
PK-12 Alignment Model will be able to articulate the following:
– Scale-up MTSS district-wide
• How much do these implementation procedures look the same?
• What is vertical articulation in terms of policies, procedures/practices, and data?
– Leadership
• How is the leadership organized structurally? (PK-12 Alignment Workgroup will take
primary responsibility but Leadership Workgroup will deliver information)
– Grade Levels
• What is consistent across grade levels?
• What is different across grade levels?
Family and Community Engagement
The mission of the Inter-Project Family and Community
Engagement Workgroup is to build the capacity of
families and educators to engage in collaborative, databased problem-solving in order to support student
learning within MTSSS. Communication networks will
be developed to share information and products among
key stakeholders in order to increase families’
awareness and understanding of PS/RtI as well as
educators’ awareness and understanding of families’
role in PS/RtI. Training modules, informational videos,
and tools will be developed in order to build families’
and educators’ skills in collaborative, data-based
problem-solving.
Sub Leadership Team Activities
District Action Planning & PS (DAPPS) Process
Integrating materials and resources
Mapping of resources
Evaluation models for state-wide and interproject activities
• Inter-project Professional Development process
• Plan for “rollout”
• Summer Conference
•
•
•
•
Goal
• Begin working in inter-project teams at the
district level by Fall 2011
• Build a resource and support system for
DLTs
• Define our support and evaluation systems
as we implement.
District Action Planning &
Problem-Solving (DAPPS) Process
• Collaboration of PSRtI, FLPBS and DA staff
– 2-4 person district teams
• Protocol for DAPPS Process
– Step 1: District readiness for DAPPS
– Step 2: Needs Assessment
– Step 3: Action Planning – Group problem-solving
used
– Step 4: Delivery of Training and TA
– Step 5: Evaluation
Needs Assessment
• Determine if the district mission statement includes
appropriate, measurable student accountability goals
• Determine whether the district is demonstrating continued
growth based on academic and behavioral data (Making
gains, performance declining, stagnant)
• Determine if district leadership organized to implement RtI
with integrity and necessary support
• Determine whether the district is using a District Plan for RtI
Implementation
• Determine capacity for district-based professional
development and technical assistance
• Determine level of RtI implementation in the district
• Identify regional technical assistance support priorities
– Based on data gathered in areas 1-5, what are the recommended
TA priorities?
– Based on aggregate data gathered in areas 1-5, identify the three
most common TA needs in the region
Needs Assessment Debriefing
• Three sources/types of data
– Archival quantitative data
– Self-report data
– Interview data
• Summary Debriefing
– Sets the stage for organizational Problem-Solving
– Sensitive to district concerns of “looking bad”
– Structured as “hypothesis testing” format (i.e.,
problem analysis at the district level).
Problem-Solving MTSS Implementation
at the District Level
• Four basic “hypotheses” to frame Needs
Assessment data:
1. Are students meeting academic & behavioral
achievement/growth expectations? If not
sufficient…Why?
2. Check the fidelity of implementing MTSS at the
district and building levels? If not sufficient…Why?
3. Check the capacity to implement the necessary
infrastructures for supporting MTSS? If not
sufficient…Why?
4. Is there sufficient consensus/buy-in among all
stakeholders for implementing MTSS?
Don Kincaid
PBS Project
Co-Director
Heather George
PBS Project
Co-Director
George Batsche
Michael Curtis
Resources for
Implementation
PS/RtI Project
PS/RtI Project
Co-Director
MTSSS Inter-Project StaffCo-Director
Bambi Lockman
FLDOE
Bureau Chief
Karen Childs
PBS Project
Program Evaluator
Brian Gaunt
Inter-Project Coordinator
Jose Castillo
PS/RtI Project
Program Evaluator
Clark Dorman
PS/RtI Project Leader
Heather Diamond
FLDOE
FLDOE-RtI Project Liaison
Kathy Christiansen
PBS Project
Tech. Assist. Coord.
Stephanie Martinez
PBS Project
Tech. Assist. Coord.
Beth Hardcastle
PS/RtI Project
Regional Coordinator
Deanne Cowley
PS/RtI Project
Regional Coordinator
Kelly Justice
PS/RtI Project
Regional Coordinator
Martha Murray
PBS Project
Tech. Assist. Coord.
Therese Sandomierski
PBS Project
Tech. Assist. Coord.
Michael McAuley
PS/RtI Project
Regional Facilitator
Lisa Yount
PS/RtI Project
Regional Facilitator
Larry Ruble
PS/RtI Project
Regional Faciliator
Michelle White
PBS Project
Tech. Assist. Coord.
Anna Winneker
PBS Project
Tech. Assist. Coord
Rebecca Sarlo
PS/RtI Project
Secondary Coordinator
Shelby Robertson
PS/RtI Project
Mathematics Facilitator
Pam Sudduth
PS/RtI Project
Literacy Facilitator
Devon Minch
PBS Project
Tech. Assist. Specialist
Rose Iovannone
PBS Project
Ann Selland
DA &PS/RtI Project
RtI Specialist
Jayna Snyder
DA & PS/RtI Project
RtI Specialist
Patricia Vickers
DA & PS/RtI Project
RtI Specialist
Wendy Atkins
Staff Support, Logistics &
Comm. Coord.
Amanda March
PBS/PS-RtI Project
Post-Doc Researcher
Eileen Lyons
DA & PS/RtI Project
RtI Specialist
Roxana Santos
DA & PS/RtI Project
RtI Specialist
Kimberly Cano Taylor
DA & PS/RtI Project
RtI Specialist
Kevin Stockslager
PS/RtI Project
PS/RtI Project Evaluator
Amber Brundage
PS/RtI Project
Doctoral Research
Judi Hyde
PS/RtI Project
Communication Coord.
Stevi Schermond
PS/RtI Project
Staff Assistant
Teri Hunter
PS/RtI Project
Business Analyst
Dan Souders
PBS Project
David Davis
PS/RtI Project
Tech Support
Inter-Project
Tech Support
Inter-Project
Tech Support
Inter-Project
Organizing for Collaboration
Inter-Project (FLPBS & FL PS/RtI)
Leadership Team
Statewide Education
Collaborative Partners and
Agencies
Logistics, Communication, & Technology
MTSSS Model
Development
Work Group
MTSSS
Component
Models
“Leadership”
“MTSS Coaching”
“Data-based
Problem-solving”
“PK-12
Alignment”
“Family &
Community
Engagement”
“Accountability,
Evaluation &
Sustainability”
Service Delivery Model
Development
MTSSS Model
Curriculum
&
Assessment
Development
Inter-Project
Staff
Development
Inter-Project Program Evaluation
Development
Training &
TA Service
Data
Evaluation
System
Project &
Process
Capacity
Data
Evaluation
System
MTSSS Project “Consultants”
Inter-Project Web-based
Resource Warehouse
Specialized DLT Support Services
Differentiated Accountability
Race to the Top
Leadership
Policy & Budget
District/School Improvement
Just Read, Florida
FCRR & FCR-STEM,
ESE
FLPBS – FLPS/RtI – Secondary RTI
Student Services & Technology
District Action Planning & ProblemSolving (DAPPS) Process
District Readiness
Needs Assessment
Small Group Planning Process
(Org. Problem Solving)
Resources/Training/Tech. Assist
Evaluation of MTSSS Fidelity &
Effectiveness
District
Leadership
Team
Parents
&
Community
Partners
School
Leadership Teams
Grade/Content
Instructional Teams
Students
QUESTIONS?
Contact
Heather Peshak George, Ph.D.
• Email: hgeorge@usf.edu
Brian Gaunt, Ph.D.
• Email: bgaunt@usf.edu
University of South Florida
Website: http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu
Website: http://www.floridarti.usf.edu