Effective TeamingUsing Data to Guide Actions

Sally Helton & Lisa Bates

Behavior and Instructional SupportEffective

ObjectivesLearn about the teams that are involved in

EBIS/RTI

Understand the difference between 20% and 80% teams

Develop awareness of the components that comprise the EBIS process

PBS

MONTHLY 20% EBIS

MONTHLY

80% EBIS

QUARTERLY

SCHOOL-WIDE / GLOBAL

-Looks for Patterns in Student Behavior

-Implements Prevention Throughout School

SCHOOL-WIDE / GLOBAL

-Looks for Patterns in Student Academic Performance

-Implements Prevention In the CORE Throughout School

INTERVENTION FOCUS

-Places & Monitors Students in Academic, Behavioral, and Attendance Interventions

-Problem Solving

-Progress Monitoring

Intensifying/Exiting/Referring to SPED

TEAMING

School-wide EBIS Teams Make Sure the CORE is Healthy (80% Teams”)

• CORE Programs are healthy when they are evidence-based (e.g., Holt, CPM) and taught to ALL students consistently and with fidelity.

• We cannot expect what we don’t teach – a strong CORE Program is based on teaching SKILLS to all students.

• We know we’ve done the above when at least 80% of our students can demonstrate what we’ve taught.

• If this is not the case, EBIS Teams lead discussions about strengthening CORE Programs – NOT JUST FIXING INDIVIDUAL STUDENTS!!

• Literacy is the pathway to success: EBIS Teams must focus on reading and behavior, above all else.

Monthly EBIS Teams Discuss Students

Not Responding to the Core (“20% Teams”)

• No more than 20% of the student population should require interventions (hopefully less).

• Above all else, 20% Teams monitor student progress in interventions.

• 20% Teams do not engage in story telling, they are solution-focused about teaching academic and behavioral skills

• 20% Teams make decisions about students’ programs using data and applying decision rules and interventions from the “protocol.”

• 20% Teams use decision rules to decide when a student may need to be evaluated for a possible specific learning disability.

EBIS vs. SST/Pre-ReferralEBIS vs. SST/Pre-ReferralSST/Pre-referral

Students are identified as needing support through teacher /parent referral

Teachers are asked to “prove” student need & what interventions have been tried

Interventions are loosely defined

Typically, students do not receive interventions throughout the evaluation process – only if & when they qualify for services

A team of “experts” listens to the teacher and decides if the student “should be referred”

Interventions provided are typically not research-based (or have a replicable effect for most students)

Programmatic support is typically provided only at the end of the evaluation process (again, if & when they qualify for services)

EBIS Screen ALL students and use that data to

determine who receives interventions

Monitor all students’ progress in the general curriculum using appropriate assessments (e.g. CBM, MAZE, grades, OAKS, etc.)

Choose and implement scientifically validated interventions to deal with a student's learning problems: Using the district approved Protocols

Monitor how the student responds to the intervention by using assessments at consistent intervals

Follow formal decision rules based on data regarding which students are not making sufficient progress

Procedures exist that ensure the fidelity of intervention delivery

Determine the level of support that any student needs (regardless of eligibility) in order to be successful

Donald participates in the general curriculum

EBIS Team reviews achievement and behavioral data (school wide) and places Donald in

a group interventionDonald isn’t doing well

Donaldimproves

Donaldimproves

EBIS Team conductsIndividual Problem

Solving & a more intensive intervention is selected

Resumesgeneralprogram

Donalddoesn’t

improve

Donalddoesn’t

improve

Special Education referral is initiated

Donald probably recycles

Intervention is intense and LD is suspected

Improvement is good and other

factors are suspected as

cause

Evaluation planning meeting, Procedural safeguards provided,

consent obtained, 60 school-day timeline starts

Need to shift thinking....

All children can learn

Intervene early

Multi-tiered model

Research-based, scientifically validated instruction/ interventions

Screen, diagnose, and monitor

Make data informed decisions

RtI: Policy Considerations and Implementation, National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005

EBIS: a structured, systematic process

TeamingSchool wide planningTargeted planningRegular meeting structureTiered interventionsReferral for special education

evaluation

The EBIS team has three purposes

Review school-wide behavior and academic data (80%)

Identify students for supplemental instruction and monitor/adjust (20%)

Use RTI for Special Education eligibility

Defining “team” Teamwork is an Individual Skill (Avery, 2001)

A team is a group of individuals responding successfully to the opportunity presented by shared responsibility.

What about….Timeliness

Confidentiality

Participation

Honesty

Openness

Respect

Conflicts

Planning for Systems Change

Necessary participants

Organized data

Clear purpose

Assigned roles

Efficient process

Sufficient trust…and accountability

Necessary Participants

Staff who:Have relevant informationWill implement decisions made Possess authority to follow up

EBIS Core Team membership

Principal

Classroom Teachers

Instructional Coordinator/Reading Specialist

School Counselor/Psychologist

Learning Specialist

ELL Teacher

Organized Data

Academic

Universal screening and progress monitoring

Ready to present – easy to read format

Clear PurposeCommon understanding is key

Improvement of instruction and increased achievement for all students

Not…Pre-referralGriping Pass the buck

Assigned Roles

Facilitator

Data manager

Communicator

Recorder

Efficient Process

Participants must be prepared

Defined agenda

Commitment to stay on topic

1 hour or less

Sufficient Trust…and Accountability

Commitment to complete assigned tasks

Group agreement to accountability

Honest communication

Conflict Capable

Trusting the process

Embracing Decision Rules

Something to think about . . .

Individual commitment to a group effort, that is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilization work.-Vince Lombardi

So…we know what makes a good team… now what do the team meetings look like?

Effective Teaming

CONTENT/GRADE LEVEL EBIS TEAMS (20%)•Plan and implement small groupacademic interventions MONTHLY

•Monitors student progress in small group and individual interventions

•Makes special ed. referrals to RMT based on TTSD decision rules for adequate progress in interventions

EBIS LEADERSHIPTEAM (80%)

•Meets Quarterly•Investigates and plans school-

wide academic programs

EBS LEADERSHIP TEAM

•Meets Monthly•Plans and implements school-wide and small

group behaviorsupports

School Wide Planning(80% Meeting)

Why: To ensure that 80% of the students are at benchmark. If the core is strong, we will have the resources necessary to provide interventions for those students who are struggling.

When: Review school-wide data 3 times a year.

Who: Principal, Instructional Coordinator, Teacher, ELL and Special Ed representatives

Is your core program strong

enough?

Using data to make decisions about the 80%

Data used to determine if the core program is meeting the needs of 80% of the

students?

Academic data reviewed three times/year:

MAZE Scores Disaggregated by

EthnicityGrade LevelProgram (ELL, SPED,

etc.)

OAKS data Percent meet/exceed

benchmarks

Grades Disaggregated by

Ethnicity Subject Grade Level Teacher

Behavior data reviewed three times/year:

Office Discipline Referral trends Who (grade, gender,

ethnic group) What Where When

Attendance trends

Options to consider if the 80% Criterion is not being met in Reading:

90 minutes of English/Language Arts daily?

Protected allocated reading time each day?

Core and supplemental programs implemented with fidelity?

Additional professional development?

What do we do about the lowest 20% of the

students?

Targeted Planning

Targeted Meeting (20% Meetings)

Why: To place and monitor students in interventions

When: Occur monthly for each grade level

Who: Principal, Instructional Coordinator, Counselor, Teachers, ELL, Special Ed.

Data: OAKS, MAZE, Grades

ReadingIdentifying the 20%

Universal Screening: Every middle school student is tested on OAKS and Maze Students scoring at or below the

35th percentile on OAKS or below the 20th percentile on Maze are screened further for fluency and comprehension in order to determine the appropriate intervention.

Failing Grades

Develop intervention plans for all students:

With 2 or more F’s ORGPA of <1.4

Now that we’ve identified the students needing

interventions, we need to meet about them!

Regular Meeting Structure to Plan for the 20%.

Complete EBIS Group Intervention & Planning Form

Place students in group interventions based on screening results

Plan progress monitoring (using prescribed guidelines)

EBIS Packet Page 6

Tiered InterventionsHow do we know what

interventions students should receive?

UniversalAll Students

EBIS Packet Page 7

Screening Decision RulesEvery student at each grade level who scores

in the lowest 20 percent on MAZE, or at or below the 35th percentile on the OAKS, is:further screened with oral reading fluency measures

from 6-Minute Solution (check for fluency & accuracy); then,

the San Diego Quick is administered to evaluate what level of the SRAI to use; then,

the SRAI is administered to gauge comprehension skills; then,

for students with the most comprehensive reading needs, the Language! placement tests are administered.

EBIS Packet Page 11

EBIS Packet Page 12

EBIS Packet Page 14

We use data to ensure the intervention is working!

Progress MonitoringOn a regular basis, (two times per month with

MAZE) data are collected and analyzed to determine whether the intervention is effective.

If the intervention is not effective, there is clear criteria for when and how changes must be made.

Progress Monitoring:

Meet Monthly to consider…

1. Exiting (Intervention no longer needed)

2. Continuing (Student is making progress, but, continues to need support)

3. Intensifying (Intervention is not working and should be revised), or

4. Referring for Special Education Evaluation (Intensive intervention is proving unsuccessful

Exit from Soar when:

Maze scores indicate 3 or more data points above the aimline AND are at or above the 50th percentile; AND

Grade+ scores are at or above the 5th stanine; AND

OAKS scores are at or above the 35th percentile

Intensify reading interventions when:

Progress monitoring indicates 3 or 4 data points below the aimline (maze).

Slope is flat or decreasing AND scores are below 50th percentile (maze).

Grade+ scores at or below 3rd stanine.

After one semester of the most intensive intervention (e.g., Language! – with good attendance), progress continues below aimline on Maze, and Grade+ scores are at or below the 3rd stanine.

Use the already completed Problem Solving Worksheet to consider the whole child and possible barriers to success.

Refer for Special Education evaluation if:

High above the hushed crowd, Rex tried to remain focused. Still, he couldn’t shake one nagging thought: He was an old dog and this was a new trick.