RtI for students with significant disabilities
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

RtI for students with significant disabilities

on

  • 1,136 views

Presentationf for the Illinois Alliance for Administrators in Special Education January 20th, Springfield IL

Presentationf for the Illinois Alliance for Administrators in Special Education January 20th, Springfield IL

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,136
Views on SlideShare
1,136
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
22
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

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.

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

    RtI for students with significant disabilities RtI for students with significant disabilities Presentation Transcript

    • RtI for Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities: Effective Literacy Instruction Stefanie Bauer, S.S.P. Carrie F. De La Cruz, Ph.D. IAASE January 20th, 2011
    • www.wordle.net
    • • Background• Leg 1: Instruction• Leg 2: Assessment• Leg 3: Teaming• Conclusion Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Background
    • The practice of providing high-qualityinstruction/intervention matched tostudent needs and using learning rateover time and level of performance tomake important educational decisions. Batsche, G. M., Elliott, J., Graden, J., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J. F., Prasse, D.,Reschly, D, Shrag, J.. & Tilly, W.D. (2005). Response to Intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc.
    • In Other Words, RtI is…A data-based decision makingprocess designed to improveeducational and behavioraloutcomes for ALLstudents. Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • • Not just about books, about communication • Literacy is how we take in information and how we give information • Literacy is an important life skillBauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Learning to read and write:• Enhances cognitive development• Facilitates fuller participation at school• Increases employment opportunities• Facilitates social relationships• Provides a meaningful and enjoyable leisure pursuit.• Provides a means to communicate more effectively• Has a positive impact on self esteem Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • The 3 “Legs” of RtI: AssessmentInstruction Teaming
    • Leg 1: Instruction 1. Best Practices 2. Special Considerations 3. What We’re Doing 4. Lessons Learned
    • • Think about your district / school / student• What are you doing for Leg 1: Instruction? Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Best Practices in ReadingInstruction• National Reading Panel – 5 Big Ideas• Direct and explicit instruction• Core & supplemental research-based programs• 90 min a day Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • 3 Tiers of Reading Support 3 Tier Intensive, Individual Interventions • Individual Students 5% • More than 30 min./day of extra reading support • Progress Monitoring (1/week) 15% 2 Tier Targeted Group Interventions • Some students (at-risk) • Small group interventions plus Core Curriculum • Progress Monitoring (1/week) 1 Tier Core Instructional Interventions • All students 80% • Core Curriculum • Universal Screening (3/year) Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Special Considerations for Students with Significant Disabilities1. Many students at the earliest levels of literacy development2. Little research available about effective reading instruction for this population3. Core program may only meet the needs of a few students in the classroom4. Students have very unique and challenging learning profiles5. Given good instruction, students with significant disabilities can learn to read beyond sight words
    • Literacy Begins at Birth:Building the Foundation • Language and vocabulary development • Shared book experiences Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Whole to Part to Whole • Develop interest in books and stories • Associates pictures with words • Text carries the meaning •Speech to text boundaries •Sound manipulation skills • Alphabet •Letter / sound correspondence • Decoding individual words • Reading connected textDe La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • Book / Print Awareness Letter Writing Identification Literacy Vocabulary / Phonological Comprehension Awareness Sight Words / Phonics PicturesBauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Four Developmental Stages Fluent Literacy Learner Emergent Literacy Learner Literacy NoviceLiteracy BeginnerBauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Literacy Development Profile Beginner Novice Early to Upper Upper Emergent Emergent to FluentConcepts of Print XLetter Identification XPhonological Awareness XPhonics XSpelling and Writing XSymbol / Word Reading XVocabulary andComprehension X
    • What We’re Doing Literacy Instruction for Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities Instruction Using Combination of DIYDIY – Do It Yourself Packaged and PackagedLiteracy Instruction Comprehensive Program Program Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • http://www.mayer-johnson.com/products/all-curriculum/ De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • Instructional Planning Form (IPF) Instructional Strategies Materials Arrange- Time Assessment ments Procedures Skill Teaching Strategy • Explicit instruction in • A to Z Letter flashcards • 1:1 • Morning • LiteracyLetter letter names (80% known, 20% work time Benchmark ID unknown) – note order to Assessment – be taught Letter ID •Reading materials in Fluency • Identification of • Group •Through- letters in context classroom out day • Reading A to Z Alphabet Books •Environmental Print • Group •Afternoon •Alphabet Bingo, Alphabet reading • Practice Games Spin Game, Alphabet Egg group Puzzles •Explicit instruction in • “Phonological Awareness • 1:1 • Morning • Progress inPhono- rhyming and blending Training for Reading” work time PAlogical (compound word, curriculumAware- onset-rime, syllable) •Rhyming word sorts, ness initial sound word sorts, •Group •Afternoon •Practice Games Guess Who, Rhyming reading Bingo, etc. group
    • Lessons Learned:• Students need BOTH direct and explicit instruction in individual skills AND literacy experiences and a literacy rich environment.• Remember the written expression aspect of literacy.• Reading comprehension is strongly tied to language and vocabulary development. Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • • Are you thinking about doing something different for Leg 1: Instruction? Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Leg 2: Assessment 1. Best Practices 2. Special Considerations 3. What We’re Doing 4. Lessons Learned
    • • Think about your district / school / student• What are you doing for Leg 2: Assessment? Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Best Practices: Assessment for Different PurposesScreening / To identify who has needs. To identify how studentsBenchmark compare to one another. To measure if groups of students are making progress over time. Occurs two or more times a year for all students.Diagnostic / Skill To determine student skill strengths and weaknessesAnalysis to support instructional planning. This assessment done as needed.Progress To determine whether instruction is having an impactMonitoring on student progress on specific skills. Progress monitoring occurs monthly or weekly.Outcome / To determine if students are meeting expectedAccountability standards.
    • Best Practices: Characteristics ofProgress Monitoring Tools • Reliable • Valid • Standardized • Able to be given repeatedly over time • Sensitive to growth over time • Simple and time efficient Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Special Considerations for Students with Significant Disabilities• Students need multiple ways of demonstrating their knowledge• Accuracy more reflective of student ability than fluency – but less sensitive to small amounts of growth.• Difficult to stick to standardization• Students may have gaps in skills (e.g., comprehension)
    • What We’re DoingScreening / • Documenting levels of literacy attainmentBenchmark annually on NSSED Literacy Tracking FormDiagnostic / Skill • Collecting a variety of data to determine studentAnalysis skill strengths and weaknesses as needed. • Resources: Assessments built into curricula, CBM and CBE tools, other classroom materialsProgress • If possible, use weekly / monthly CBM fluencyMonitoring measures • If necessary, use CBM tools as accuracy measures • Resources: AIMSweb, IGDE’s, RIPM, Intervention CentralOutcome / • NSSED Literacy Tracking FormAccountability • IEP Outcomes Study • IAA Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • Research Institute on Progress Monitoring (RIPM) (www.progressmonitoring.org) – RIPM Research → Significant Cognitive Disabilities – Tools available to assess several skill areas De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • Intervention Centralwww.interventioncentral.com- CBM Warehouse → Probe Generators- Can select settings such as upper/lower/both, font, font size, number to appear on page, etc. Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • • AIMSweb (www.aimsweb.com) – Many tools available• Preschool Individual Growth and Development Indicators (IGDE’s) (www.ggg.umn.edu) – Preschool level assessments• Reading Inventories (e.g., Jerry Johns, Eckwall-Shanker) De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • “Touch the picture that says /m/ /a/ /p/” Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • De La Cruz & Bauer, NASP 2010
    • Lessons Learned• Traditional universal screening / benchmarking (all students 3x a year on same measure) does not work.• Assessment to drive instruction must be done, but may require significant modification• Progress can be very slow• Your assessment toolkit must be deep, varied, and flexible• Ongoing assessments become our re- evaluation information Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • • Are you thinking about doing something different for Leg 2: Assessment? Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Leg 3: Teaming 1. Best Practices 2. Special Considerations 3. What We’re Doing 4. Lessons Learned
    • • Think about your district / school / student• What are you doing for Leg 3: Teaming? Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • 1. A District-Level RTI Team to 1. District Leadership Team Make Things Happen for the District 2. School 2. A School Improvement TeamImprovement Team to Make Things Happen for the School 3. Grade LevelTeam with Targeted 3. A Grade-level Team with Supports Support to Make Things Happen for Groups of Students 4. IndividualProblem Solving &Special Ed Decision 4. A Problem-Solving Team to Making Team Make Things Happen for Individual Students Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Best Practices: Problem Solving Method Problem Identification Is there a problem? What is it?Plan Problem AnalysisEvaluation Why is it happening?Did our plan work? Plan Development What shall we do about it? Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Special Considerations• Students with cognitive disabilities require more intensive teaming and instructional planning efforts• Plan for their instructional needs within the wider school instruction and teaming efforts to the greatest extent possible Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • ELS School Improvement Team• Team with representation across all disciplines meets together once per month to discuss program-wide goals and issues• The program’s RtI-related goals are developed and evaluated by this 1. District Leadership Team team 2. School Improvement Team Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • ELS Individual Problem Solving Teams• A team consisting of an Administrator, Teacher, School Psychologist, SLP, OT, PT, and Program Nurse meet bi-monthly to discuss classroom and student- specific goals and issues• Lots of “informal” teaming 1. District Leadership Team amongst team members outside 2. School Improvement Team of group meeting times 3. Grade Level Team with Targeted Supports 4. Individual Problem Solving & Special Ed Decision Making Team Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Lessons Learned…• Some consistency in teaming norms, process, and procedures is necessary to make sure that literacy instruction is a focus of the team’s time and energy• Support is needed in terms of materials, training, and curriculum coaching is necessary for implementing reading instruction Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Lessons Learned…• Schedule separate team meetings to review and plan for literacy instruction. Regular team meeting time does not typically allow for in depth problem solving on a student’ literacy progress.• Teachers want to be held accountable for providing effective literacy instruction• Enlist parent support for carryover Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • • Are you thinking about doing something different for Leg 3: Teaming? Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Conclusion
    • Beginning of the School Year –August / September• Identify student current skill level using existing resources and additional data when necessary.• Develop comprehensive instructional plan• Identify progress monitoring strategy (what, when, who). Relate to IEP goals when appropriate.• Implement instructional plans • Obtain / Create materials • Put instructional time in schedule • Identify training needs • Periodically review progress on implementation• Implement progress monitoring plan • Obtain / organize materials • Train Staff when necessary • Create graph / chart for data review Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • Middle of the School Year –October – March• Regularly update progress monitoring data on chart / graph• Periodically review data to determine whether students are making adequate progress. Make instructional changes when appropriate. Note changes on instructional plan.• Periodically check to ensure instructional plans are being carried through with integrity. Are we doing what we said we would do? Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • End of the School Year –April – June• Conduct Re-Evaluations • Review existing data • Update of student skill level / skill analysis • Describe current instruction plan • Identify direction of future instruction • Identify opportunities for generalization• Write New Goals • Identify current level of performance across areas • Identify area for new goal • Work with team to write goal• Update Literacy Tracking Form • Identify current skill development level • Describe current instructional plan • Include current progress monitoring data Bauer & De La Cruz, IAASE 2011
    • ContactInformation Stefanie Bauer sbauer@nssed.org Carrie De La Cruz cdelacruz@nssed.org