Response to Intervention (RTI)

Response to Intervention (RTI)

From the From the Veil of IgnoranceVeil of Ignorance to a Blanket of Informed to a Blanket of Informed Decision-MakingDecision-Making

SB 1116SB 1116

From the From the Veil of IgnoranceVeil of Ignorance to a Blanket of Informed to a Blanket of Informed Decision-MakingDecision-Making

SB 1116SB 1116

AZ’s Response to Intervention

AZ’s Response to Intervention

Information retrieved from

from the world-wide web

in 2006 via the research of

Frank M. Gresham, Ph.D.

Educational Psychology Program

University of California-Riversideat

http://www.ccssponline.org/ppts/Gresham_Training_PowerPoint.ppt

2001

Information retrieved from

from the world-wide web

in 2006 via the research of

Frank M. Gresham, Ph.D.

Educational Psychology Program

University of California-Riversideat

http://www.ccssponline.org/ppts/Gresham_Training_PowerPoint.ppt

2001

LD IDENTIFICATION IS “WAIT-TO-FAIL” LD IDENTIFICATION IS “WAIT-TO-FAIL” Developmental Odds of LDDevelopmental Odds of LD

LD IDENTIFICATION IS “WAIT-TO-FAIL” LD IDENTIFICATION IS “WAIT-TO-FAIL” Developmental Odds of LDDevelopmental Odds of LD

Age 6: 37,369 (out of 328,674 all disabilities)

Age 7: More than doubles (2.34 odds) Age 8: Almost doubles again (1.84

odds) Age 9: Goes up by 1.5 odds again Age 10: Increase of 47,000 cases Age 11: Increase of 20,000 cases Age 12: Increase of 4,000 cases (peaks)

24th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of IDEA (2002).

Age 6: 37,369 (out of 328,674 all disabilities)

Age 7: More than doubles (2.34 odds) Age 8: Almost doubles again (1.84

odds) Age 9: Goes up by 1.5 odds again Age 10: Increase of 47,000 cases Age 11: Increase of 20,000 cases Age 12: Increase of 4,000 cases (peaks)

24th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of IDEA (2002).

AZ READS

BackgroundAZ READS Home     |     Background     |     State Board Policy     |     TimeLine     |     Implementation

                          Background on AZ READS

The Importance of Early Reading Assessments: A Prevention ModelThe last decade has seen a dramatic shift in focus from conventional thoughts and practices in teaching children to read to a more careful awareness of the scientific research evidence about reading. As a result, we know more

about how children learn to read, why some children have difficulty learning to read, and what instructional practices are most effective. Evidence-based findings supported by scientific research reached full public

awareness with the publication of Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children, The Report of the National Reading Panel and the dissemination of what works in professional development and instructional practice (e.g.

Every Child a Reader, Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science). This converging body of research led to strong support for its implementation in our nation's classrooms through Title I Part B, Reading First in the No Child Left

Behind Act of 2001. Central to evidence-based practice is the use of valid and reliable assessments that inform the ongoing instructional process by identifying at-risk students as early as possible in order to intervene

immediately. By continuously monitoring student progress and adjusting instruction accordingly using evidence-based strategies, we can prevent reading difficulties from becoming reading problems and reverse the cycle of

failure many of our students currently experience. The resulting shift from a remediation model of reading instruction to a prevention model forms the foundation of AZ READS, Arizona's state reading initiative. A.R.S. §15-704, passed with broad-based support in spring 2001, is its cornerstone. It holds schools and districts accountable for implementing evidence-based programs, materials

and instructional practices, using screening, diagnostic and progress monitoring assessments to drive instruction, and appropriates $1 million for the professional development of K-3 teachers of reading.

Subsections A and D of A.R.S. §15-704 require definition and specificity by the State Board of Education. An AZ READS Task Force was convened by the Arizona Department of Education on the State Board's behalf to examine

these subsections and make recommendations regarding their implementation. New Board PolicyState Board Policy

ImplementationImplementation

TimelineTimeline

 

Contact InformationAZ READS

Arizona Department of Education1535 West Jefferson Street, Bin 5

Phoenix, Arizona 85007Deputy Associate Superintendent, Kathryn Hrabluk

Tel: (602) 364-2333Fax: (602) 364-0902

 This page was last updated on

Tuesday, October 17, 2006.

RTI:Defined

RTI:Defined

RTI based on adequateadequate or or inadequateinadequate change in academic performance or behavior as a function of intervention

Eligibility determination based on how children respond to evidence-based interventions implemented with integrity.

RTI also used to select, change, or titrate interventions based on how well or poorly the child responds (not exclusively an eligibility process)

Origins of RTI traced to National Research Council (NRC report of 1982) NRC report evaluated SPED classification on 3 criteria:

Quality of general education program Value of SPED in producing important outcomes for children Accuracy & meaningfulness of assessment process in identification of disability

First 2 deal with quality of the instructional program Last criterion deals with response to instruction

RTI based on adequateadequate or or inadequateinadequate change in academic performance or behavior as a function of intervention

Eligibility determination based on how children respond to evidence-based interventions implemented with integrity.

RTI also used to select, change, or titrate interventions based on how well or poorly the child responds (not exclusively an eligibility process)

Origins of RTI traced to National Research Council (NRC report of 1982) NRC report evaluated SPED classification on 3 criteria:

Quality of general education program Value of SPED in producing important outcomes for children Accuracy & meaningfulness of assessment process in identification of disability

First 2 deal with quality of the instructional program Last criterion deals with response to instruction

IDEIA 2004 LawIDEIA 2004 Law

Individuals with DisabilitiesEducation Improvement Act of 2004

IDEA REAUTHORIZATION2004, NCLB of 2001

IDEA REAUTHORIZATION2004, NCLB of 2001

SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITIES:

(A) GENERAL: Notwithstanding section 602 of this Act or any other provision of law, when determining if a child has a specific learning disability as defined under this Act, the LEA shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, reading recognition . . .

(B) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY: In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, a LEA may use of process which determines if a child responds to a scientific, research based intervention.

SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITIES:

(A) GENERAL: Notwithstanding section 602 of this Act or any other provision of law, when determining if a child has a specific learning disability as defined under this Act, the LEA shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, reading recognition . . .

(B) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY: In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, a LEA may use of process which determines if a child responds to a scientific, research based intervention.

Key Concepts in RTI:Treatment Validity of Assessment

Key Concepts in RTI:Treatment Validity of Assessment

Treatment validity: Degree to which assessment information contributes to beneficial outcomes for individuals.

Incremental validity Utility and cost benefit Evidential & Consequential Bases for Use & Interpretation (Messick, 1995)

Traditional assessment practices do not inform instruction Traditional assessment practices do not inform behavioral

interventions Treatment validity criterion requires:

Identification of relevant areas of concern (academic or behavioral) Informs treatment planning Useful in evaluating treatment outcomes

Concept of RTI Depends Largely on Treatment Validity Criterion

Treatment validity: Degree to which assessment information contributes to beneficial outcomes for individuals.

Incremental validity Utility and cost benefit Evidential & Consequential Bases for Use & Interpretation (Messick, 1995)

Traditional assessment practices do not inform instruction Traditional assessment practices do not inform behavioral

interventions Treatment validity criterion requires:

Identification of relevant areas of concern (academic or behavioral) Informs treatment planning Useful in evaluating treatment outcomes

Concept of RTI Depends Largely on Treatment Validity Criterion

Advantages of RTIAdvantages of RTI

Early identification of learning/behavior problems (leads to more effective interventions)—Avoids “wait to fail”

Conceptualizes learning/behavior problems from risk rather than deficit model

Can lead to reduction of identification biases (overrepresentation issues)

Strong focus on student outcomes Measures & domains based on relationships to child outcomes Documents relationships to positive child outcomes (not predictions of

failure) Emphasizes direct measurement of achievement, behavior, & the instructional

environment Focuses on measurable and changeable aspects of instructional environment Identifies “instructional causalities”

Early identification of learning/behavior problems (leads to more effective interventions)—Avoids “wait to fail”

Conceptualizes learning/behavior problems from risk rather than deficit model

Can lead to reduction of identification biases (overrepresentation issues)

Strong focus on student outcomes Measures & domains based on relationships to child outcomes Documents relationships to positive child outcomes (not predictions of

failure) Emphasizes direct measurement of achievement, behavior, & the instructional

environment Focuses on measurable and changeable aspects of instructional environment Identifies “instructional causalities”

TRADITIONAL VS. [DATA DECISION MAKING]

MODELS FOR LD IDENTIFICATION

TRADITIONAL VS. [DATA DECISION MAKING]

MODELS FOR LD IDENTIFICATION Focuses on within-child

ability-achievement discrepancies

Causes presumed to be largely

due to internal/organismic variables

Unexpected underachievement (relative to ability)

IQ-Achievement discrepancy is marker for presence of LD

Assumes better classification leads to better treatment

Presumes stability of ability over time

Presumes presence of mythical aptitude X treatment interactions (ATIs)

Focuses on within-child ability-achievement discrepancies

Causes presumed to be largely

due to internal/organismic variables

Unexpected underachievement (relative to ability)

IQ-Achievement discrepancy is marker for presence of LD

Assumes better classification leads to better treatment

Presumes stability of ability over time

Presumes presence of mythical aptitude X treatment interactions (ATIs)

Focuses on outcomes, specifically response to intervention

Causes presumed to be largely due to external/contextual variables

Unexpected underachievement (relative to good instruction)

Failure to respond to empirically validated instruction is marker for LD (ruling out other causes)

Presumes change in achievement over time relative to intervention

Focuses on outcomes, specifically response to intervention

Causes presumed to be largely due to external/contextual variables

Unexpected underachievement (relative to good instruction)

Failure to respond to empirically validated instruction is marker for LD (ruling out other causes)

Presumes change in achievement over time relative to intervention

PARADIGM SHIFT IN [PreK-3 READING ASSESSMENT]

PRACTICES

PARADIGM SHIFT IN [PreK-3 READING ASSESSMENT]

PRACTICES

Shift from assessment-only oriented practice (refer-test-place model)

To, assessment-intervention-evaluation oriented practice (RTI) Assessment shifts from static (one shot) assessment To, continuous progress monitoring of response to intervention Students can and should be deemed eligible for LD services

based on an inadequate response to an evidence-based intervention implemented with integrity

Paradigm shift is a move away from admiring the problem to doing something about the problem

Shift from assessment-only oriented practice (refer-test-place model)

To, assessment-intervention-evaluation oriented practice (RTI) Assessment shifts from static (one shot) assessment To, continuous progress monitoring of response to intervention Students can and should be deemed eligible for LD services

based on an inadequate response to an evidence-based intervention implemented with integrity

Paradigm shift is a move away from admiring the problem to doing something about the problem

RESPONSIVENESS TO INTERVENTION

RESPONSIVENESS TO INTERVENTION

Change in behavior or performance as a function of intervention

Reflects discrepancy between pre-and post-intervention levels of performance

Goal of all interventions is to produce a discrepancy between baseline & post-intervention performance

Failure to produce such a discrepancy within a reasonable period of time using an evidence-based intervention implemented with integrity can and should be used to evidence for presence of LD

Discrepancy Reasonable period of time Evidence-based intervention Integrity

Gresham, F.M. (2002). Response to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. In R. Bradley, L.Danielson, & D. Hallahan (Eds.), Learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 467-519). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Change in behavior or performance as a function of intervention

Reflects discrepancy between pre-and post-intervention levels of performance

Goal of all interventions is to produce a discrepancy between baseline & post-intervention performance

Failure to produce such a discrepancy within a reasonable period of time using an evidence-based intervention implemented with integrity can and should be used to evidence for presence of LD

Discrepancy Reasonable period of time Evidence-based intervention Integrity

Gresham, F.M. (2002). Response to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. In R. Bradley, L.Danielson, & D. Hallahan (Eds.), Learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 467-519). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

RESPONSIVENESS TO INTERVENTION,ANY QUESTIONS SO FAR, SENATORS

& HONORABLE GUESTS?

RESPONSIVENESS TO INTERVENTION,ANY QUESTIONS SO FAR, SENATORS

& HONORABLE GUESTS?

RTI MODELSRTI MODELS

Problem Solving Approaches [Informed Data Decision Making Models Problem identification Problem analysis Plan implementation Plan evaluation

Standard Protocol Approaches Evidence-based treatment protocols National Reading Panel Recommendations NICHD funded research

Problem Solving Approaches [Informed Data Decision Making Models Problem identification Problem analysis Plan implementation Plan evaluation

Standard Protocol Approaches Evidence-based treatment protocols National Reading Panel Recommendations NICHD funded research

Responsiveness to Intervention Model [Levels of

Instruction]

Responsiveness to Intervention Model [Levels of

Instruction] 

 

Degree of Unresponsiveness to InterventionLOW HIGH

HIGH

Inte

nsi

ty o

f T

reat

men

t

Level I

Universal Interventions

Level II

Selected Interventions

Level III

Intensive Interventions

Level IV

Special Education IEP Determined

SKILLS BASE OF HIGHLY QUALIFIED EDUCATIONAL PRACTIONERS

[PreK-3]

SKILLS BASE OF HIGHLY QUALIFIED EDUCATIONAL PRACTIONERS

[PreK-3]

Knowledge and skills in progress monitoring, particularly curriculum-based assessment (CBM)

Knowledge and skills in early identification of reading difficulties using brief diagnostic assessments (e.g., Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills or DIBELS) -add preK instruments

Knowledge and skills in evidence-based academic instruction, particularly in reading (e.g., phonological core, decoding, fluency, empirically-supported reading instruction)

Knowledge and skills in conducting systematic observation-based assessments (frequency, duration, intensity)

Knowledge and skills in conducting functional behavioral assessments (FBA)

Knowledge and skills in designing, implementing, and evaluating behavioral interventions for problem behaviors and social skills

Knowledge and skills in progress monitoring, particularly curriculum-based assessment (CBM)

Knowledge and skills in early identification of reading difficulties using brief diagnostic assessments (e.g., Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills or DIBELS) -add preK instruments

Knowledge and skills in evidence-based academic instruction, particularly in reading (e.g., phonological core, decoding, fluency, empirically-supported reading instruction)

Knowledge and skills in conducting systematic observation-based assessments (frequency, duration, intensity)

Knowledge and skills in conducting functional behavioral assessments (FBA)

Knowledge and skills in designing, implementing, and evaluating behavioral interventions for problem behaviors and social skills

What are the PreK-3 Education Issues? What’s the

problem?

What are the PreK-3 Education Issues? What’s the

problem?The IQ Achievement Discrepancy

Model is used to over identify students for special education services.

A significant number of students are currently pulled for instruction and not mainstreamed in a fully non-restrictive learning environment.

Diagnosis using the “Wait to Fail” model does not result in early prevention & intervention.

The IQ Achievement Discrepancy Model is used to over identify students for special education services.

A significant number of students are currently pulled for instruction and not mainstreamed in a fully non-restrictive learning environment.

Diagnosis using the “Wait to Fail” model does not result in early prevention & intervention.

AZ’s RTIA Rawls & Locke Perspective

AZ’s RTIA Rawls & Locke Perspective

Presented by

Senator TovarSB 1116

Presented by

Senator TovarSB 1116

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon a its Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.”

On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon a its Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.”

PREAMBLEDeclaration of Human

Rights

PREAMBLEDeclaration of Human

Rights Whereas, the peoples of the United

Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas, Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas, the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas, Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Article 26.Article 26.

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages Elementary education shall be compulsory Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religion us groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages Elementary education shall be compulsory Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religion us groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

Cosmopolitan RawlsianismAn Application of the Contemporary

Social Contract

Cosmopolitan RawlsianismAn Application of the Contemporary

Social Contract

“Justice is the FIRST VIRTUE of social institutions.”

A Theory of JusticeRawls, 1970

“Justice is the FIRST VIRTUE of social institutions.”

A Theory of JusticeRawls, 1970

THE RAWLSIAN FACTS:THE RAWLSIAN FACTS:

Rawls is a social contractarian. Rawls subscribes to anti-sentimentalism. Rawls invokes pro-Kantian rationalism

resulting in high moral understandings of universal principles of justice & rights.

Morally, Rawls appealed to the moral development theories of Piaget & Kohlberg.

Rawl is BEST known for his contemporary contributions to cosmopolitan liberalism -i.e., a global, social community ( ).

Rawls is a social contractarian. Rawls subscribes to anti-sentimentalism. Rawls invokes pro-Kantian rationalism

resulting in high moral understandings of universal principles of justice & rights.

Morally, Rawls appealed to the moral development theories of Piaget & Kohlberg.

Rawl is BEST known for his contemporary contributions to cosmopolitan liberalism -i.e., a global, social community ( ).

Recap: What are the PreK-3 Education Issues?

Recap: What are the PreK-3 Education Issues?

The IQ Achievement Discrepancy Model is used to over identify students for special education services.

A significant number of students are pulled for instruction and not

mainstreamed in a fully non-restrictive learning environment.

Diagnosis using the “Wait to Fail” model does not result in quick and early intervention.

The IQ Achievement Discrepancy Model is used to over identify students for special education services.

A significant number of students are pulled for instruction and not

mainstreamed in a fully non-restrictive learning environment.

Diagnosis using the “Wait to Fail” model does not result in quick and early intervention.

Direct Application of Rawlian Pragmatic Principles to RTI ModelDirect Application of Rawlian Pragmatic Principles to RTI Model

Original Position –”Rational agents/ideal spectator/human calculators” unkowning of social economic status, race, ethnicity, nationalism act on BEHALF of their trustees (unknowing of their trustees (i.e., children in an RTI model –the ed. situation/issue at hand).

Under the Veil of Ignorance (unknowing of the PreK-3 childs’ SES, national status, race, ethnicity, or reading ability), common stakeholders & multiple perspectives engage in a universal egalitarian act of public justification.

Original Position –”Rational agents/ideal spectator/human calculators” unkowning of social economic status, race, ethnicity, nationalism act on BEHALF of their trustees (unknowing of their trustees (i.e., children in an RTI model –the ed. situation/issue at hand).

Under the Veil of Ignorance (unknowing of the PreK-3 childs’ SES, national status, race, ethnicity, or reading ability), common stakeholders & multiple perspectives engage in a universal egalitarian act of public justification.

Interactive Table ExerciseInteractive Table Exercise

Puzzle Pieces for each table to socially construct the components of RTI and link the philosophical ideas.

Puzzle Pieces for each table to socially construct the components of RTI and link the philosophical ideas.