july 2007alaska department of education and early development1 response to instruction part ii...
TRANSCRIPT
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development 1
Response to InstructionPart II
Linking the Data to Instruction
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
2
Agenda
Review of acronyms
Progress monitoring
Response to instruction
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
3
RTI Resources
Hardcastle, B. & Justice, K. (2006). RTI and the Classroom Teacher, LRP Publications
www.fcrr.org www.interventioncentral.org www.whatworksclearinghouse.com www.metiri.com/techsolutions/ www.mcrel.org
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
4
Protocol
Purpose to have respectful, in-depth, insightful conversation about teaching and learning
Listen while others are speaking Be respectful of others comments
and/or suggestions Be cognizant of time if there is
established limit
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
5
Alphabet Soup – Alaska Acronyms
ACFA – Alaska Computerized Formative Assessment
AYP – adequate yearly progress
CBM – curriculum based measures
ELL – English language learner
ELP – English language proficiency
GLE – Grade Level Expectations
HSGQE – High School Graduation Qualifying Exam
LEP – limited English proficient
NCLB – No Child Left Behind
PM – progress monitoring PSGLE – Performance
Standards/Grade Level Expectations
RTI – Response to Instruction (in Alaska) or Response to Intervention
SBA – Standards Based Assessment
SM – strategic monitoring
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
6
Linking the Data
Determine which programs are getting results
Get to the “root causes” of problems Guide curriculum development and revision Promote accountability Meet federal and state requirements Better understand the school Continuously improve the system
Bernhardt, V. (1998), Data Analysis for Continuous School Improvement
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
7
Progress Monitoring
Scientifically based practice used to assess students’ academic performance
Evaluates the effectiveness of instruction Student’s level of performance is determined and
goals identified Student’s academic performance measured on
regular basis (weekly or monthly) Progress toward goal measured Teaching adjusted as needed based on the
measurements National Center on Student Progress Monitoring, 2007
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
8
Response to Instruction
Response to Instruction addresses the needs of ALL to meet the needs of EACH.
J. Knutson, 2007
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
9
Response to Instruction
Multi-tiered Problem solving approach Effective instruction Formative assessments Effective instructional interventions based on
data from assessments Increasing levels of intensity based on need of
all Most struggling Outperforming
Progress monitoring All decisions based on data
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
10
Response to Instruction
Tier I – Core – 80%
Students will be able to access the standards with instruction
provided with the core curriculum
Tier II – Strategic – 15%
Students will need targeted instructional interventions in
order to access the standards
Tier III – Intensive – 5%
Students will need intensive instructional interventions
in order to access the standards
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
11
Response to Instruction – Change Way of Thinking
Change our way of thinking From deficit model to at-risk model Old thinking – view students as having
deficit, some children will fail to learn New thinking – view students as at risk,
all kids will learn to basic proficiency level
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
12
Old Thinking - Deficit Model
Assumption:In every distribution of kids,some of them have specificdeficits and thereforewill fail to learn. Level below
whichwe infer possibledeficits
AchievementLow High
Dave Tilly, Alaska EED Winter Conference, 2007
Historical Practice:The job of the assessor is to assess studentsto identify their deficits so wecan provide services. We usethe best tools available, matched to students’ presumed deficits.
We use these data to help identify what and how to teach.
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
13
New Thinking - RTI Model
Assumption:All kids will learnbasic skills to a basiclevel of proficiency.Some kids are at riskof not learning them.
Practice:The job of the assessor is to to identify students who are atrisk of not learning basic skillsto a minimum standard of proficiency. Also, the assessoridentifies patterns of performanceon instructionally relevantsubskills.
We use these data to figure whatAnd how to teach these students.
Dave Tilly, Alaska EED Winter Conference, 2007
Minimum Proficiency
Achievement
Low High
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
14
5%
15%
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Based on assessment data•High Intensity•Of longer duration
Strategic Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response
80%Universal Instruction•All students•Preventive, proactive
Response to Instruction: A School-Wide System for Student Success
Tier III -
Intensive
Tier II -Strategic
Tier I -Core
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
15
Big Ideas to Ensure Effective Response to Instruction
Use evidence-based practice to extent available
Match instruction to individual student needs Ensure the instruction is sufficiently explicit
and sufficiently intense Monitor fidelity of implementation Monitor student response and change
instruction as necessary Dave Tilly, Alaska EED Winter Conference, 2007
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
16
Response to Instruction - Tier I
Tier I Core curriculum Effective instruction Universal screening Early instructional intervention Effective for most students – approx. 80% of students
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
17
Tier II Supplements core curriculum Instructional interventions supported by data
Individual/small group instruction Progress monitoring
Response to Instruction – Tier II
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
18
Tier III Small percentage of student population
More intensive instructional interventions
Find successful instructional interventions
Useful prior to special education referral
Response to Instruction – Tier III
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
19
Response to Instruction (RTI) Lab Utilizing the previous brainstormed list of
assessments, place them into the three tiers according to their use
Utilizing the list of instructional materials, place them into the three tiers according to their use
How did you determine the placement in each tier?
What did you discover about the instructional materials and assessments utilized in your district and schools?
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
20
RTI Lab #2
Utilizing your SBA and/or AIMSweb data, place the percentages of students that with this data alone fall into a tier.
Complete this information for one subject area at the school or district level
Compare the instructional materials triangle, assessment triangle and the data triangle
What do you notice? What “AHA” can you share with the group?
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
21
School Reading Program Sample 3rd Grade
LMB, Slingerland Seeing Stars, Rewards, SRA High Performance Writing, Primary Phonics, Direct
Instruction45 minutes daily, 2 - 3 per group
Read Naturally, Peer Tutors, Parent Volunteer Tutors
At Home Support, Flexible Grouping15 minutes daily, 3 - 5 per group
Harcourt, Differentiated Instruction, Trade Books, Content Texts; Strategies – Literature
circles, Content reading, Shared reading, Guided reading, SSR,
Think alouds90 minutes daily
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
22
School Reading Program Sample -3rd Grade
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
23
Lab
Using the Sample Grade 3 School Reading Program as a guide
Select a curricular area: reading, writing or math
Begin to map out what your school or district uses at present and if there are “gaps” and identify what you might need to fill the “gaps”
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
24
RTI School Wide Model What it is
Represents a way of using data to examine the system in relation to the most important results
Structuring thinking so that we don’t miss anything
Identifying strategies with a high probability of improving student performance and knowing if they work
Keeping our attention focused on the most important things
Common sense into practice (cf. Fullan)
What it is not A panacea
A curriculum, an intervention, one theoretical orientation
One size fits all
Hoops to jump through
Easier than what came before
Dave Tilly, Alaska EED Winter Conference, 2007
July 2007 Alaska Department of Education and Early Development
25
Response to Instruction
Tier I – Core
Tier II – Strategic
Tier III – Intensive