Superintendent’s meeting December 4 th , 2013 RTI – Response to Intervention MTSS – Multi-Tiered System of Supports RtI/MTSS in Iowa is an every-education decision- making framework of evidence-based practices in instruction and assessment that addresses the needs of all students starting in general education. BCLUW CSD, Elementary Cedar Falls CSD, Cedar Heights Elementary East Marshal CSD, Elementary and Preschool Hampton-Dumont CSD, Southside Elementary Hubbard-Radcliff CSD, Elementary Mason City CSD, Harding Elementary, Lincoln Intermediate, Roosevelt Elementary Cedar Valley Catholic School System, St. Edward School Selection Process Robust Universal Instruction at Universal Tier (Content/Instruction) Universal Screening (Assessment) CIA Evidence-Based instructional interventions at the Targeted and Intensive levels (Instruction) Progress Monitoring (Assessment) Data-Based Decision-Making (System) December 2011, Iowa DE, Response to Intervention Guidance Document Reverse Jeopardy – School Improvement for $500 Question: How do we begin implementing RtI/MTSS processes? Answer: By establishing solid Universal Tier/core instruction. We cannot intervene our way out of a core instruction problem RtI/MTSS is a proactive and preventive process Robust Universal Instruction at Universal Tier (Content/Instruction) Universal Screening (Assessment) CIA Evidence-Based instructional interventions at the Targeted and Intensive levels (Instruction) Progress Monitoring (Assessment) Data-Based Decision-Making (System) December 2011, Iowa DE, Response to Intervention Guidance Document Assessments Critical Features Universal Screening • Predictive of future academic success • Identify who is at-risk • Conducted at least three times a year • Used with All students • Brief to administer and score (5 – 15 minutes) Progress Monitoring • Rates of growth and level of performance • Conducted on a routine basis (weekly) • Used with students who are at-risk or identified as having a disability • Brief to administer and score (1 – 10 minutes) • Collaborating for Iowa’s Kids • Phase One Implementation • Fall 2013 • 7 Phonemic Awareness – Onset Sounds and Word Segmenting Phonics and Decoding – Letter Names, Letter Sounds and Nonsense Words Word ID – Sight Words Rate with Connected Text – Sentence Reading and Oral Reading Fluency Concepts of Print – Concepts of Print Comprehension – aReading Adaptive Assessment Oral Language: Picture Naming Phonological Analysis: Rhyming and First Sounds Alphabetic Knowledge: Sound Identification Comprehension: Which One Doesn’t Belong Accepts and displays universal screening and progress monitoring assessments and data Supports tracking individual student interventions Provides secure access to data at all levels – teacher, building, district, AEA, state • Collaborating for Iowa’s Kids • Phase One Implementation • Fall 2013 • 10 Robust Universal Instruction at Universal Tier (Content/Instruction) Universal Screening (Assessment) CIA Evidence-Based instructional interventions at the Targeted and Intensive levels (Instruction) Progress Monitoring (Assessment) Data-Based Decision-Making (System) December 2011, Iowa DE, Response to Intervention Guidance Document Standard Treatment Protocol Research tells us what works – so why not start there Simple rules for selecting students for interventions based upon screening data Implementation protocol to improve fidelity Simple rules (guide points) for examining progress and moving students to more intensive or less intensive interventions if needed. The standard protocols are intimately linked with PD efforts Iowa will recommend that this approach be used for targeted (tier 2) instruction. Standard Treatment Protocol in Iowa – from a recent DE FAQ document “A Standard Treatment Protocol (STP) would include a combination of skills such as decoding, fluency, spelling, vocabulary, and comprehension. The skills are bundled together across activities so students have multiple opportunities to practice the skills…. ….Regardless of the specific area of need most students will make gains because the STP will cover multiple skills and bundles them together to provide meaningful opportunities to practice. This is in contrast to identifying one skill area and teaching it in isolation without connecting it to other skills”. Identifying evidenced-based STP will be part of the work completed by the Iowa Reading Research Center Robust Universal Instruction at Universal Tier (Content/Instruction) Universal Screening (Assessment) CIA Evidence-Based instructional interventions at the Targeted and Intensive levels (Instruction) Progress Monitoring (Assessment) Data-Based Decision-Making (System) December 2011, Iowa DE, Response to Intervention Guidance Document Membership Internal Coach Data Coach Content Specialist Instructional Leader – Building External Coach (AEA staff) Training and ongoing support being facilitated by the DE (face to face training, coaches webinars, team meeting structures, knowledge base on TIER) • Collaborating for Iowa’s Kids • Phase One Implementation • Fall 2013 • 19 Data Based Decision-Making -Collaborative Inquiry: “Asking the Right Questions at the Right Time” Q1. Is the Universal Tier Sufficient Q5. Have Universal actions been effective? Q4. How will the implementation of Universal Tier action be monitored over time? Q2. If the Universal Tier is not sufficient, what are the needs that must be addressed? Q3. How will the Universal Tier needs be addressed? 20 Collaborative Inquiry Questions: Operationalizing RtI PracticesUniversal Tier Instruction 1. Is the Universal Tier sufficient? 2. If the Universal Tier is not sufficient, what are the needs that must be addressed? 3. How will Universal Tier needs be addressed? 4. How will the implementation of the Universal Tier actions be monitored over time? 5. Have Universal Tier actions been effective? Evaluation Needs Assessmen t Implementa tion Planning Collaborative Inquiry Questions: Operationalizing RtI Practices Targeted /Intensive Tiers 6. Which students need support in addition to the Universal Tier? 7. Which of the Targeted and/or Intensive Tier options is needed to meet the needs of identified students? 8. How will the Targeted and/or Intensive Tier options be implemented? 9. How will the implementation of the Targeted and Intensive Tiers be monitored over time 10. Using the data and information, which students need changes to the Tiers they are receiving? Evaluation Needs Assessmen t Implementa tion Planning Big Idea- Use data (Universal Screening data) to determine if universal tier instruction is meeting the needs of students and to begin identifying students who are at-risk for not meeting end of year outcomes Connection with CIP - Needs Assessment RtI ~1-5% Intensive Tier: Individualized, intensive, evidence-based instruction for a few students Targeted Tier: Small group, targeted, evidence-based instruction for some students ~5-10% Universal Tier: Robust instruction in the IELS & Iowa Core For All Students ~80-90% of Students 24 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkK1bT8ls0M Percent of students at or above benchmark 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 71% 64% 70% 71% 65% 62% 58% 53% 35% Overall Pre K Kdg 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th Area Result Number of sites with overall 6 out of approx. 89 sites results above 80% (6.95%) Range of percent of students on track across schools 29% to 89% Average percent of students 63.66% on track 33% 29 Schools 60% 53 Schools % of schools needing intensive universal support % of schools needing targeted universal support % of schools needing no additional universal support 7% 6 schools Big Idea: Multiple sources of data are used to determine the root cause as to why universal tier is not sufficient. Connection with CIP - Needs assessment Einstein is quoted as having said that if he had one hour to save the world he would spend fifty-five minutes defining the problem and only five minutes finding the solution. This quote illustrates an important point: before jumping right into solving a problem, we should step back and invest time and effort to improve our understanding of it. Collaborative Inquiry - Question #2: Digging Deeper – K-6 Building Blocks - Thematic Organizers Universal Tier Triage - Desired Practices (coming 2014-15) Instructional Time Collaboration Q2 – If Universal Tier is not sufficient, what are the needs that must be addressed? Assessment for Learning Instructional Materials and Practices Enacted Curriculum Collaborative Inquiry – Question #2 Digging Deeper – K-6 Leveled Questions - What questions leading to Why questions and next steps - Progression of advances in practice (Level 1 questions will be focused on during the 2013-14 school year) Building Block Level 1 Question** Instructional time Is there a protected, scheduled 60-120 daily literacy block? Enacted and Learned Curriculum Do administrators and teachers regularly engage in Professional Learning focused on the Iowa Core/Early Learning literacy standards? Instructional Materials and Practices Do all teachers have access to a comprehensive Universal/ELA materials for use school-wide? Assessment for Learning Are teachers collecting daily evidence of student learning based on learning goals and success criteria? Collaboration Are administrators, teaching staff and parents utilizing data to work as a collaborative team to promote positive individual outcomes? **Currently, there are up to 4 levels of questions developed for each building block Standard Treatment Protocol (tier 2) Collaborative Inquiry for Question 2 – Levels 2, 3 and 4 Diagnostic Assessment Processes Intensive intervention resources (tier 3) Implementation monitoring Next “roll out” phase Given the current emphasis on Universal Tier instruction (and at least initially away from the development of individual interventions), how might the RtI conversations in your district change? How can we improve our conversations around Universal Tier content, instruction and assessment issues? What data do we currently use to answer the question: Is our Universal Tier Sufficient? How could we get even better at using these data? How do our staff currently use the “collaborative inquiry questions”? What could be done to make these questions become more central to our data-based decision-making discussions?