Connecting evidence based instructional practices to rti
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Connecting evidence based instructional practices to rti



A presentation for the Aspiring Leaders Academy.

A presentation for the Aspiring Leaders Academy.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Connecting evidence based instructional practices to rti Connecting evidence based instructional practices to rti Presentation Transcript

  • Connecting Evidence-Based Instructional Practices to RTI
    William Baker
  • Agenda
    RTI Basics Review
    What’s in the Courts
  • Tertiary Prevention:
    Systems for Students with Intensive Needs
    Secondary Prevention:
    Specialized Group
    Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior
    Primary Prevention:
    Wide Systems for
    All Students,
    Staff, & Settings
    ~80% of Students
  • RTI Review
    Five basic parts
    Tiered Level of Instruction
    Progress Monitoring
    Data-Based Decision Making
  • Four Step Process
    • Step 1: Screening (Responsibility: General Education and Special Education)
    • Step 2a: Implementing General Education (Tier 1; Responsibility: General Education)
    • Step 2b: Monitoring Responsiveness to General Education (Responsibility: General Education and Special Education)
  • Four Step Process (continued)
    Step 3a: Implementing a Supplementary, Diagnostic Instructional Trial (Tier 2; (Responsibility: General Education and Special Education)
    Step 3b: Monitoring Responsiveness to a Supplementary, Diagnostic Instructional Trial (Tier 2; Responsibility: General Education and Special Education)
    Step 4: Designation of Disability, Classification of Disability, and Special Education Placement (Responsibility: Special Education)
  • Commissioner’s Rules
    (9)  Learning disability.
    (A)  Prior to and as part of the evaluation described in subparagraph (B) of this paragraph and 34 CFR, §§300.307-300.311, and in order to ensure that underachievement in a child suspected of having a specific learning disability is not due to lack of appropriate instruction in reading or mathematics, the following must be considered:
  • Commissioner’s Rules
    (i)  data that demonstrates the child was provided appropriate instruction in reading (as described in 20 USC, §6368(3)), and/or mathematics within general education settings delivered by qualified personnel; and
  • Commissioner’s Rules
    (ii)  data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal evaluation of student progress during instruction. Data-based documentation of repeated assessments may include, but is not limited to, response to intervention progress monitoring results, in-class tests on grade-level curriculum, or other regularly administered assessments.Intervals are considered reasonable if consistent with the assessment requirements of a student's specific instructional program.
  • Commissioner’s Rules
    (B)  A student with a learning disability is one who:
    (i) has been determined through a variety of assessment tools and strategies to meet the criteria for a specific learning disability as stated in 34 CFR, §300.8(c)(10), in accordance with the provisions in 34 CFR, §§300.307-300.311; and
    (ii) does not achieve adequately for the child's age or meet state-approved grade-level standards in oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading fluency skills, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation, or mathematics problem solving when provided appropriate instruction, as indicated by performance on multiple measures such as in-class tests; grade average over time (e.g. six weeks, semester); norm- or criterion-referenced tests; statewide assessments; or a process based on the child's response to scientific, research-based intervention ; and
  • Commissioner’s Rules
    (I) does not make sufficient progress when provided a process based on the child's response to scientific, research-based intervention (as defined in 20 USC, §7801(37)), as indicated by the child's performance relative to the performance of the child's peers on repeated, curriculum-based assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting student progress during classroom instruction ; or
  • Commissioner’s Rules
    (II) exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both relative to age, grade-level standards, or intellectual ability , as indicated by significant variance among specific areas of cognitive function, such as working memory and verbal comprehension, or between specific areas of cognitive function and academic achievement.
  • Why do you write FIEs?
    Establishing eligibility
    Documenting intervention efforts
    “Determining why a child has not responded to research-based interventions requires a comprehensive evaluation.”
    Comments to the Federal Regulations 2006
  • RTI in the Courts
    General education process for identification
    Child Find
    Parent Requests
  • Web Resources
    What Works Clearinghouse
    Intervention Central
    Florida Center for Reading Research
    National Center for Accelerating Student Learning (CASL)
  • A Familiar Sounding Problem
    Ana’s car gets 25 miles per gallon of gas. Nick’s car gets 17 miles per gallon of gas. And Sara’s car gets 12 miles per gallon of gas. How many more miles per gallon of gas does Ana’s car get than Sara’s car?
  • National Math Panel Report
    Curricular Content
    Learning Processes
    Teachers and Teacher Education
    Instructional Practices
    Instructional Materials
  • Math Instructional Practice
    All-encompassing recommendations that instruction should be entirely “student centered” or “teacher directed” are not supported by research. If such recommendations exist, they should be rescinded. If they are being considered, they should be avoided. High-quality research does not support the exclusive use of either approach.
  • Math Instructional Practice
    Research has been conducted on a variety of cooperative learning approaches. One such approach, Team Assisted Individualization (TAI), has been shown to improve students’ computation skills. This highly structured pedagogical strategy involves heterogeneous groups of students helping each other, individualized problems based on student performance on a diagnostic test, specific teacher guidance, and rewards based on both group and individual performance. Effects of TAI on conceptual understanding and problem solving were not significant.
  • Math Instructional Practices
    Teachers’ regular use of formative assessment improves their students’ learning, especially if teachers have additional guidance on using the assessment to design and to individualize instruction. Although research to date has only involved one type of formative assessment (that based on items sampled from the major curriculum objectives for the year, based on state standards), the results are sufficiently promising that the Panel recommends regular use of formative assessment for students in the elementary grades.
  • Math Instructional Practices
    The use of “real-world” contexts to introduce mathematical ideas has been advocated, with the term “real world” being used in varied ways. A synthesis of findings from a small number of high-quality studies indicates that if mathematical ideas are taught using “real-world” contexts, then students’ performance on assessments involving similar “real-world” problems is improved. However, performance on assessments more focused on other aspects of mathematics learning, such as computation, simple word problems, and equation solving, is not improved.
  • More Math Instructional Practices
    Explicit instruction with students who have mathematical difficulties has shown consistently positive effects on performance with word problems and computation. Results are consistent for students with learning disabilities, as well as other students who perform in the lowest third of a typical class. By the term explicit instruction, the Panel means that teachers provide clear models for solving a problem type using an array of examples, that students receive extensive practice in use of newly learned strategies and skills, that students are provided with opportunities to think aloud (i.e., talk through the decisions they make and the steps they take), and that students are provided with extensive feedback.
    This finding does not mean that all of a student’s mathematics instruction should be delivered in an explicit fashion. However, the Panel recommends that struggling students receive some explicit mathematics instruction regularly. Some of this time should be dedicated to ensuring that these students possess the foundational skills and conceptual knowledge necessary for understanding the mathematics they are learning at their grade level.
  • Even More!!!
    Research on instructional software has generally shown positive effects on students’ achievement in mathematics as compared with instruction that does not incorporate such technologies. These studies show that technology-based drill and practice and tutorials can improve student performance in specific areas of mathematics. Other studies show that teaching computer programming to students can support the development of particular mathematical concepts, applications, and problem solving.
  • Math Interventions
    Feedback to students, parents, and teachers
    Peer tutoring
    Explicit teaching of math concepts
    Small Group instruction
    Teacher directed (with modeling)
    Academically focused
    Individual student needs
    Task Analysis and Self-Talk
  • Math Intervention
    Small Group/Individual
    Explicit explanations
    Pictorial representations
    Verbal rehearsal with fading
    Intensive timed practice on mixed problem sets
    Cumulative review
    Concrete materials
    Peer tutoring and pairing
  • Math-What Works Clearinghouse
    Elementary – Odyssey Math (web based: K -8) and Everyday Mathematics (PK-6)
    Middle School – Cognitive Tutor Algebra I (software and textbooks); I CAN Learn Pre Algebra and Algebra (software); and The Expert Mathematician (software and printed consumables
    High School – Core Plus Mathematics (four-year curriculum)
  • What Works Clearinghouse
    Program Reviews
    Practice Guides
  • Math-Intervention Central
    Incremental Rehearsal
    Question-Answer Relationships to Interpret Math Graphics
    Story Problem Solving Steps
  • Intervention Central
    RTI resources
  • Combine these two sentences…
    John went to the store.
    John bought three apples.
  • Combine these sentences…
    Future administrators are smart.
    Future administrators deserve higher salaries.
  • Combine these sentences…
    I did not get enough gifts.
    My wife was mad at me.
  • Writing Intervention
    Explicit teaching of letters and words
    Instruction focused on explicit orthographic (letter) patterns
    Transfer of instruction into writing practice
    Written Expression
    Increased writing practice
    Combining two related sentences into one
  • Writing Intervention
    SRSD – Self-Regulated Strategy Development
    Develop and activate background knowledge (Class)
    Discuss the strategy, including benefits and expectations (Class)
    Model the strategy (Teacher)
    Memorize the strategy (Student)
    Support the strategy collaboratively (Teacher & Class)
    Use the strategy by yourself, independently (Student)
  • Writing Intervention
    SRSD (continued)
    Goal setting
    Self-instruction (e.g., talk-aloud)
  • Writing – What Works Clearinghouse
    Read, Write & TypeTM
    Teaches reading through writing
    Six to nine year olds
    More of an alphabetics program
  • Writing-Pointers from Vaughn and Bos
    Writing strategies – planning, revising, and editing
    Combine sentences
    Work in cooperative pairs
    Establish goals
    Access and practice to word processing
    Prewriting practices
    Inquiry activities to analyze data
    Extended time for writing and revision
    Provide models of good writing for comparison
    Use writing to enhance knowledge of content
    Strategies for Students with Learning and Behavior Problems, 7th ed. P. 381-2
  • Basic Reading - WRLD
    Cognitive processes
    Phonological Awareness
    Alphabetic principle and coarticulation
    Rapid Naming
    Phonological Memory
    Orthographic (Surface)
  • Basic Reading Intervention
    Direct Instruction
    Explicit Code Instruction
    Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS)
  • Basic Reading Intervention
    Small group/individual
    “program is less important than how it is delivered” Learning Disabilities, Fletcher, et al., p.161.
    Intensity (greater number of hours for grade 2 and above)
    Explicit instruction
    Academic content, teach to mastery, provide scaffolding and emotional support, and monitor progress
  • Basic Reading-What Works Clearinghouse
    Corrective Reading
    DaisyQuest(software package)
    Early Intervention in Reading (EIR) (picture books)
    Fast ForWord(computer-based products)
    Ladders to Literacy (supplemental curriculum)
    Lexia Reading (computer program)
    Lindamood Phonemic Sequencing (LiPS)
  • Basic Reading-What Works Clearinghouse (cont.)
    Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS)
    Read, Write & Type (software)
    Reading Recovery (tutoring program)
    Sound Partners (tutoring program)
    SpellRead(Grade 2 or above)
    Start Making a Reader Today (SMART) (tutoring program)
    Stepping Stones to Literacy (SSL) (supplemental curriculum)
  • Basic Reading-What Works Clearinghouse
    Success for All (SFA)
    Voyager Universal Literacy System*
    Waterford Early Reading Program
    Wilson Reading System
  • Basic Reading – NRP Report
    Phonemic Awareness Training
    Manipulating phonemes with letters
    Teaching one or two types of phoneme manipulations
    Teaching in small groups
    Systematic systems
    Synthetic Phonics—Teaching students explicitly to convert letters into sounds (phonemes) and then blend the sounds to form recognizable words.
  • Reading Comprehension
    Listening Comprehension
    Cognitive Processes
    Listening Comprehension
    Working Memory
    Making inferences
    Comprehension monitoring
    Story structure sensitivity
  • Reading Comprehension Interventions
    Explicit instruction
    Multiple opportunities for instruction
    Carefully sequenced lessons
    Strategy instruction
    Involving content area teachers in reading comprehension instruction
  • Reading Comprehension - Interventions
    Comprehension monitoring
    Cooperative learning
    Graphic and semantic organizers
    Story structure
    Question answering
    Question generating
    Multiple strategy teaching
  • Reading Comprehension – Interventions for LD
    Activating background knowledge
    Comprehension monitoring
    Focusing on main idea in summarization
    Explicit teaching of vocabulary
    Graphic and semantic organizers
  • Vocabulary-NRP
    Oral language development
    Age appropriateness/Ability appropriateness
    Computer instruction
    Storybook reading/listening to others
    Learning words before reading a text
    Repeated exposure in various contexts
    Substituting easy words for more difficult words for low-achieving students
  • Comprehension - NRP
    Comprehension monitoring
    Cooperative learning
    Use of graphic and semantic organizers
    Question answering
    Question generation
    Story structure
    Combining multiple strategies
  • Reading Comprehension-What Works Clearinghouse
    Early Intervention in Reading (EIR)
    Failure Free Reading (Language Development Program)
    Lexia Reading
    Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies
    Reading Recovery
    Sound Partners
    Start Making a Reader Today (SMART)
  • Reading Comprehension-Intervention Central
    “Click or Clunk?”: A Student Comprehension Self-Check
    Advanced Story Map
    Keywords: A Memorization Strategy
    Main-Idea Maps
    Mental Imagery: Improving Text Recall
    Oral Recitation Lesson
    Prior Knowledge: Activating the “Known”
    Reading Comprehension Fix-Up Skills
    Reciprocal Teaching: A Reading Comprehension Package
    Text Lookback
  • Reading Fluency
    Double Deficit
    Cognitive Processes
    Word recognition
    Rapid naming
    Speeded processing
    Executive functioning
    Orthographic processing
  • Reading Fluency - Interventions
    Repeated oral readings
    Peer and adult modeling
    Read Naturally
    Oral reading of short, interesting passages
    Read with a videotape at a challenging pace
    Monitoring progress through graphing
    Reading lists of words
    Grouping words orthographically
  • Reading Fluency-What Works Clearinghouse
    Corrective Reading (Early Reading)
    Fluency Formula (supplemental curriculum 1-6)
    Ladders to Literacy
    Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies
    Reading Recovery
    Sound Partners
    Start Making a Reader Today (SMART)
    Fast ForWord (adolescent)
    Reading Mastery (adolescent)
  • Reading Fluency-Intervention Central
    Assisted Reading Practice
    Error Correction & Word Drill Techniques
    HELPS Reading Program
    Kids as Reading Helpers: A Peer Tutor Training Manual
    Listening Passage Preview
    Paired Reading
  • The Florida Center for Reading Research
  • Bibliography
    Strategies for Educating Students with Learning and Behavioral Problems, 7th Ed – Bos and Vaughn
    Learning Disabilities: From Identification to Intervention – Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, and Barnes