Based on your evaluation, what tier of instruction would you recommend for Kateri?

This case study set is intended to be a supplement to the IRIS Center's RTI Module series, providing additional opportunities to practice the application of basic progress monitoring concepts within the response to intervention (RTI) approach. There are two prerequisites for using this case study set. The first is a basic understanding of the RT approach. If you are unfamiliar with RTI, we recommend that you view the IRIS Module: - RTI (Part 1): An Overview The second prerequisite is an understanding of progress monitoring within the RTI approach. You can learn more about progress monitoring by viewing the IRIS Modules: - RTI (Part 2): Assessment - RTI (Part 4): Putting It All Together ey ldeas - Response to intervention is an instructional approach that serves two primary purposes: - It provides early intervening services to struggling students as a means through which to improve their skills. - It can be used to identify students who have learning disabilities. - RTI typically addresses student needs through multiple tiers of increasingly intensive instructional interventions. - Whether it is used for early intervening or for the identification of students with learning disabilities, RTI always incorporates the following elements: - High-quality instruction (i.e., instruction based on research-validated practices) - Frequent progress monitoring - Increasingly intense levels of intervention - Data-based decision making - RTI has many potential benefits, including that: - It provides early instructional intervention to those who need it. - It requires that teachers rely on assessment data to support their instructional decisions. - It reduces inappropriate special education referrals and placements. - It accommodates multiple levels of intervention. - It increases the use of research-validated instructional practices in the general education classroom. - RTI consists of the components outlined in the table below. Background Student: Clay Age: 7 Grade: 2 Scenario The La Quinta Elementary School support team is ready to review the Tier 2 progress monitoring data for a number of students. One of these students, Clay, has received Tier 2 instruction for thirteen weeks. The school support team will evaluate Clay's progress monitoring data to determine how he has responded to Tier 2 instruction and to decide which instructional tier would best meet his needs. The team will use the dual-discrepancy approach to answer these questions. The criteria the team are using to determine whether a student is responding adequately to instruction is a performance level of 40wpm and a rate of growth of 1.3. Once the school support team has completed its evaluation of Clay's data, his teacher will contact Clay's parents and arrange a meeting to discuss Clay's progress and the team's recommendations regarding his tier placement. What a STAR Sheet is... A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... Data-based decision making in RTI is the process of collecting data and using it to make instructional decisions, such as which students are struggling with reading and which tier of instruction would best meet those students' academic needs. What the Research and Resources Say... - By monitoring the progress of all the students in a classroom, teachers can make instructional changes to improve their students' academic growth, including among those who are struggling with reading. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, n.d.) - By examining an individual student's progress monitoring data, educators can determine whether that student is responding adequately to the instruction he or she is receiving, and make appropriate instructional decisions accordingly. (Johnson, Mellard, Fuchs, \& McKnight, 2006) - A minimum of five data points is required to assess a student's response to instruction. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2007; Stecker, 2007) - By collecting progress monitoring data, educators can determine which intervention or types of instruction work best for all students in the class. (Johnson, Mellard, Fuchs, \& McKnight, 2006) Connection to RTI Data-based decision making is a central concept in RTI. School personnel collect screening and progress monitoring data and then base their instructional decisions on these data. The table below summarizes these decisions. Tips for Implementation When using data to make instructional decisions, teachers will often find it beneficial to have guidelines. These should specify what procedures to use when collecting and evaluating assessment data. Factors to consider includ. - The measures to be used to monitor progress and the frequency with which these measures will be administered (e.g., the Vanderbilt Word Identification Fluency probe administered once per week). - The method to be used to evaluate students' response to instruction (e.g., dual discrepancy) - The criterion to be used to define "adequate" response to instruction (e.g., established benchmarks) - The frequency of collecting progress monitoring data to document students' reading performance (e.g., every one to two weeks) - The amount of data sufficient to allow reasonable certainty about instructional decisions. For example, a teacher needs at least five data points to determine whether a student is responding adequately to Tier 1 instruction - The rules to determine the appropriate level of instructional intensity (i.e., tier placement) based on students' progress monitoring data - The number of weeks targeted instruction will be delivered before response to that instruction is evaluated and a tier placement decision is made. For example, a round of Tier 2 might be implemented for 10 weeks. \begin{tabular}{l} Round of Intervention: \\ A set period of time, determined by the school or district, \\ during which an intervention is implemented. Some students \\ may receive more than one round of intervention. \\ \hline \end{tabular} Keep in Mind - School personnel must understand the purpose and intent of data collection. This allows them to more effectively use the data to make various decisions at different times throughout the RTI process. Typically, a school team (e.g., a school support team) is created to interpret students' data and to make tier placement decisions. At least one member of the school team should have expertise related to interpreting data. - Any time a decision is made regarding a student's instructional needs, parents should be involved in the process. - The most effective methods of evaluating a student's response to instruction are examining the rate of growth, the performance level, or both. What the Research and Resources Say... - Progress monitoring probe scores have been shown to be highly correlated with standardized test scores. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2003) - Scores on progress monitoring probes indicate how students are reading compared with other students in their class and with a normative sample of grade-level peers. (Vaughn \& Chard, 2006; Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2006) - Performance level can be used to determine which students are not responding adequately to general education instruction (i.e., Tier 1 instruction) or to targeted instruction (i.e., Tier 2 instruction). (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2006; Good, Simmons, \& Kame'enui, 2001) Tips for Implemntation At the end of a monitoring period (e.g., seven weeks of Tier 1 instruction), the teacher compares a student's performance level to the benchmark specified by the measure being used. To do this, he or she examines the student's graph and calculates the student's average score on the three most recent probes. An indicator used to identify the expected understandings and skills needed for content standards by grade level. - If a student's average score on the last three probes is equal to or greater than the benchmark, the student is responding adequately to instruction. - If a student's score is below the specified benchmark, more intensive instruction is warranted. xample Note: This example is also used on the STAR Sheet "Determining Rate of Growth" for a comparison of two of the methods for evaluating student performance. During the second week of school, Mrs. Haversham administered a universal screening measure to each student in her first-grade classroom. Danisha scored in the bottom ten percent of her class-the criterion that indicates that she may not be responding to instruction. To determine whether or not Danisha was adequately responding to Tier 1 instruction, Mrs. Haversham monitored her progress for ten weeks using Vanderbilt University Word Identification Fluency (WIF) probes. Danisha's progress monitoring graph is shown below. Using that data, Mrs. Haversham calculates the student's average score on the three most recent probes. Mrs. Haversham and the school support team determine that Danisha's performance level is 15wpm, which is below the established ten-week benchmark of 21 wpm. This indicates that Danisha is not responding adequately to instruction and may benefit from Tier 2 instruction. ips for Implementation Universal Screening After administering a universal screening, the teacher determines the performance level of each student by examining his or her scores. To ascertain which students may not be responding adequately to instruction in the general education classroom (Tier 1), the teacher may use one of three methods: - Compare each student's performance level to an established benchmark - Rank order the students and identify the lowest performing students in a class (or in a grade level) - Select a certain percentage of the lowest performing students (e.g., the bottom 20 percent of the class) Tier 1 After monitoring the progress of a student for five to ten weeks in Tier 1 , the teacher will evaluate that student's performance level to determine whether the student needs more targeted instruction (i.e., Tier 2 instruction). In order to do so, the teacher needs to have a criterion with which to compare the student's scores. The criteria for evaluating a student's progress will vary depending on the progress monitoring measure being used. Each progress monitoring measure specifies the benchmarks that indicate an adequate response to intervention for that measure. These criteria also vary for each type of probe and for each grade level. For example, the end-of-year benchmark for the Vanderbilt University Passage Reading Fluency probe for second grade is 75 words read correctly in one minute. Consequently, a student would need to score 75 or above to be considered performing at or above grade level. Tier 2 Teachers can evaluate the performance of a student receiving Tier 2 instruction by examining that student's progress monitoring data. However, it is recommended that teachers use the dual-discrepancy approach to determine whether a student is responding adequately to Tier 2 instruction. To learn more about this approach X What a STAR Sheet is... A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... Rate of growth (or slope) indicates how much a student's reading skills have improved over time. It is usually represented by the slope of a student's graphed scores. What the Research and Resources Say... - The rate of growth is a measure of how many new words a student is learning, on average, each week. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2003) - Teachers can examine the slopes of the students in their classes, compare them with normative expectations for growth, and determine which students are not making adequate progress. (McMaster, Fuchs, Fuchs, \& Compton, 2002; Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2003) - The rate of growth provides a good indication of whether a student will meet an established goal or benchmark (e.g., an end-of-year goal). (Vaughn \& Chard, 2006) - The recommended rate of growth will vary by grade and by probe. (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hintze, \& Lembke, 2007) Tips for Implementation At the end of a monitoring period (e.g., seven weeks of Tier 1 instruction), the teacher should compare the student's slope to the rate of growth specified by the progress monitoring measure being used. A student's slope can be determined with the following pieces of information: - The score on the first probe: y1 - The score on the last probe: y2 - The first administration (e.g., week 1): x1 - The last administration (e.g., week 8): x2 Slope=x2x1y2y1 - If a student's slope is equal to or greater than the specified rate of growth le.g., 1.8 on the first-grade Vanderbilt University WIF probe), the student is responding adequately to instruction. See A below. - If a student's slope is less than the specified rate of growth, more intensive instruction (i.e., Tier 2 instruction) is warranted. See B below. xample Note: This example is also used on the STAR Sheet "Determining Performance Level" for a comparison of two of the methods for evaluating student performance. During the second week of school, Mrs. Haversham administered a universal screening measure to each student in her first-grade classroom. Danisha scored in the bottom ten percent of her class-the criterion indicating that she may not be responding to instruction. To determine whether or not Danisha was adequately responding to Tier 1 instruction, Mrs. Haversham monitored her progress for ten weeks using Vanderbilt University WIF probes. Danisha's progress monitoring graph is below. Using that data, Mrs. Haversham calculates Danisha's rate of growth (i.e., slope). Danisha's Rate of Growth (y2=14) (y1=10)x2x1y2y1=1011410=94=.44 (x2=10) (x1=1) Mrs. Haversham determines that Danisha's rate of growth is .44, which falls below the established criterion of 1.6. This indicates that Danisha is not responding adequately to Tier 1 instruction and may benefit from Tier 2 instruction. ep in Mind Tier 1 Although some teachers may evaluate a student's performance in reading by examining performance level, others prefer to examine a student's rate of growth because it allows them to predict whether that student is going to meet a mid-year or end-of-year benchmark. In addition: - The criteria for evaluating rate of growth vary depending on the progress monitoring measure being used and for each grade level. - Each progress monitoring measure specifies the rate of growth that indicates an adequate response to intervention for that measure. - Teachers and schools can purchase software that graphs and helps to interpret student progress monitoring data. Tier 2 Teachers can evaluate the performance of a student receiving Tier 2 instruction by examining that student's progress monitoring data. However, it is recommended that teachers use the dual-discrepancy approach to determine whether a student is responding adequately to Tier 2 instruction. To learn more about this approach, see Page 22 . What a STAR Sheet is... A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... The dual-discrepancy approach is a met hod that involves evaluating a student's performance level and rate of growth. It is the preferred method for determining whether students are responding adequately to Tier 2 and subsequent tiers of instruction. What the Research and Resources Say... - The use of both criterion, performance level and rate of growth, has been shown to be the most reliable means of distinguishing between students who respond to instruction and those who do not. (McMaster, Fuchs, Fuchs, \& Compton, 2002) - Unlike with the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, the use of both criterion (performance level and rate of growth) to determine academic progress avoids gender bias or the overrepresentation of specific ethnic groups in special education services. (Speece, 2005) - Students who are below the criteria for both performance level and rate of growth are not responding to the high-quality instruction provided and may benefit from more intensive instruction. (McMaster, Fuchs, Fuchs, \& Compton, 2002) Tips for Implementation The dual-discrepancy approach is recommended for evaluating a student's response to Tier 2 instruction and to more intensive levels of instruction. It is important to note that there is no set sequence for the evaluation of performance level and rate of growth. For the purposes of this case study, an order has been imposed on this process (see the steps below) because experience indicates that it is more common for students to meet their performance-level expectations (i.e., benchmarks) than to meet their rate-of-growth expectations (i.e., slopes). In effect, evaluating performance level first might reduce the amount of work teachers undertake to make tier decisions. When evaluating student progress for Tier 2, teachers should: Step 1: Evaluate the performance level for each struggling student - If a student's performance level meets or exceeds the relevant benchmark, the student is making adequate progress (see the table below). - If a student's performance level does not meet the benchmark Go to Step 2. Step 2: Evaluate the rate of growth - If a student's slope meets or exceeds the established rate of growth, the student is making adequate progress (see the table below). . - If a student's slope does not meet the established rate of growth Provide Tier 3 intensive, individualized instruction. cample Andy, a first-grade student, has received Tier 2 instruction for 10 weeks. It is now time for his teacher and the S-team to determine whether he has responded adequately to instruction and to make an instructional placement decision based on his progress monitoring data. Using the dual-discrepancy approach, his teacher first determines his performance level. If Andy's performance level meets or exceeds the relevant benchmark, the team will determine that he is making adequate progress and will either discontinue Tier 2 instruction or provide another round of Tier 2 instruction. If Andy's performance level does not meet the ten-week benchmark, 37 wpm, the team will calculate his rate of growth (i.e., slope). Step 1: Evaluate Andy's performance level Andy's performance level is 34wpm. Because he did not meet the designated ten-week benchmark of 37wpm, his teacher needs to calculate his rate of growth. Step 2: Evaluate Andy's rate of growth Andy's rate of growth is 2.1, which exceeds the established criterion of 1.8. This indicates that Andy is not dually discrepant and may discontinue Tier 2 instruction. Because Andy has not met his benchmark, some teams might decide that Andy would benefit from another round of Tier 2 instruction. A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... Making tier placement decisions is the process in which a school team evaluates a student's progress monitoring data and decides what level of instruction the student needs. The team can decide that the student needs 1) more intensive, 2) less intensive, or 3 ) the same level of instruction. What the Research and Resources Say... - The most reliable way to make a tier placement decision for Tier 2 and beyond is to use the dual-discrepancy approach. (McMaster, Fuchs, Fuchs, \& Compton 2002; Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2007) - The data are compared to pre-established criteria. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2006) - Multiple tiers of intervention allow for increasingly intensive interventions. (Vaughn Gross Center, 2003) - A recommended approach to the tier placement process is to create a school team that examines students' data and makes data-based tier placement decisions. (TN Dept of Ed., 2007; Bender \& Shores, 2007) - As members of the RTI decision-making team, parents can offer an additional perspective and contribute to the success of the RTI approach for their child. (Bergeson, 2006) Tips for Implementation One major application of data-based decision making under the RTI approach is to help school personnel make tier placement decisions, of which there are two general types: tier initiation and tier discontinuation. Tier Initiation Process Ieceive Ile I msucilum umy Note: When Tier 3 is special education, an IEP meeting must be held to change or discontinue intervention services. Keep in Mind When they implement the RTI approach, schools should: - Specify the criteria to be used to define "inadequate" response to instruction (e.g., established normative benchmarks). - When a student's data indicate that the student is not making adequate progress in the general education classroom (i.e., Tier 1 instruction), the school team may determine that he or she would benefit from additional targeted instruction (i.e., Tier 2). - When the data for a student who has received one or more rounds of Tier 2 instruction indicate that he or she is now performing at grade level, the student may be able to discontinue Tier 2 instruction and maintain his or her level of performance with Tier 1 instruction only. - School personnel need to be sure that a student has mastered and can maintain the skills acquired during intervention before that intervention is discontinued. - A student may be referred for a special education evaluation at any point in the RTI process. What a STAR Sheet is... A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... Communicating with parents involves notifying and discussing with them their child's progress and response to instruction. What the Research and Resources Say... - Involving parents in all phases of RTI implementation is one of the keys to its success. Parents bring another perspective to the decision-making process that increases the likelihood that RTI interventions will be effective. (Bergeson, 2006) - Sharing normative standards of performance with parents le.g., the benchmarks or criteria that define responsiveness to instruction) will smooth the process of making tier placement decisions. (Johnson, Mellard, Fuchs, \& McKnight, 2006) Tips for Implementation - The school should establish communication with the parents at the beginning of the school year to explain the RTI process and to provide families with information about the core instruction and instruction at the various levels. - Schools should have procedures in place to ensure that parents are informed of their child's progress at critical junctures (e.g., after the universal screening, before changes in their child's tier placement are made). - Teachers should meet with parents at least once a year for parent conferences. Additionally, teachers should meet with parents when instructional changes are made. - Schools should offer translators (as needed) for written and verbal communication with parents. - Communication with parents is especially important when a student is identified as having some additional need that will be met through a more intense level of instruction (e.g., Tier 2). When meeting with parents, a teacher should focus on specific student needs and bring a graph of the student's progress monitoring data to interpret for the parents. The graph can: - Provide a point of reference for the discussion between the teacher and parents - Present an objective picture of the student's performance - During a parent-teacher meeting, teachers should be prepared to discuss the issues parents typically are interested in: - Their child's progress compared to his or her past achievement - Their child's progress compared to other students - The goals their child is expected to meet by the end of the school year - If a student's slope is equal to or greater than the specified rate of growth le.g., 1.8 on the first-grade Vanderbilt University WIF probe), the student is responding adequately to instruction. See A below. - If a student's slope is less than the specified rate of growth, more intensive instruction (i.e., Tier 2 instruction) is warranted. See B below. kample Note: This example is also used on the STAR Sheet "Determining Performance Level" for a comparison of two of the methods for evaluating student performance. During the second week of school, Mrs. Haversham administered a universal screening measure to each student in her first-grade classroom. Danisha scored in the bottom ten percent of her class-the criterion indicating that she may not be responding to instruction. To determine whether or not Danisha was adequately responding to Tier 1 instruction, Mrs. Haversham monitored her progress for ten weeks using Vanderbilt University WIF probes. Danisha's progress monitoring graph is below. Using that data, Mrs. Haversham calculates Danisha's rate of growth (i.e., slope). Danisha's Rate of Growth (y2=14) (y1=10)x2x1y2y1=1011410=94=.44 (x2=10) (x1=1) This case study set is intended to be a supplement to the IRIS Center's RTI Module series, providing additional opportunities to practice the application of basic progress monitoring concepts within the response to intervention (RTI) approach. There are two prerequisites for using this case study set. The first is a basic understanding of the RT approach. If you are unfamiliar with RTI, we recommend that you view the IRIS Module: - RTI (Part 1): An Overview The second prerequisite is an understanding of progress monitoring within the RTI approach. You can learn more about progress monitoring by viewing the IRIS Modules: - RTI (Part 2): Assessment - RTI (Part 4): Putting It All Together ey ldeas - Response to intervention is an instructional approach that serves two primary purposes: - It provides early intervening services to struggling students as a means through which to improve their skills. - It can be used to identify students who have learning disabilities. - RTI typically addresses student needs through multiple tiers of increasingly intensive instructional interventions. - Whether it is used for early intervening or for the identification of students with learning disabilities, RTI always incorporates the following elements: - High-quality instruction (i.e., instruction based on research-validated practices) - Frequent progress monitoring - Increasingly intense levels of intervention - Data-based decision making - RTI has many potential benefits, including that: - It provides early instructional intervention to those who need it. - It requires that teachers rely on assessment data to support their instructional decisions. - It reduces inappropriate special education referrals and placements. - It accommodates multiple levels of intervention. - It increases the use of research-validated instructional practices in the general education classroom. - RTI consists of the components outlined in the table below. Background Student: Clay Age: 7 Grade: 2 Scenario The La Quinta Elementary School support team is ready to review the Tier 2 progress monitoring data for a number of students. One of these students, Clay, has received Tier 2 instruction for thirteen weeks. The school support team will evaluate Clay's progress monitoring data to determine how he has responded to Tier 2 instruction and to decide which instructional tier would best meet his needs. The team will use the dual-discrepancy approach to answer these questions. The criteria the team are using to determine whether a student is responding adequately to instruction is a performance level of 40wpm and a rate of growth of 1.3. Once the school support team has completed its evaluation of Clay's data, his teacher will contact Clay's parents and arrange a meeting to discuss Clay's progress and the team's recommendations regarding his tier placement. What a STAR Sheet is... A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... Data-based decision making in RTI is the process of collecting data and using it to make instructional decisions, such as which students are struggling with reading and which tier of instruction would best meet those students' academic needs. What the Research and Resources Say... - By monitoring the progress of all the students in a classroom, teachers can make instructional changes to improve their students' academic growth, including among those who are struggling with reading. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, n.d.) - By examining an individual student's progress monitoring data, educators can determine whether that student is responding adequately to the instruction he or she is receiving, and make appropriate instructional decisions accordingly. (Johnson, Mellard, Fuchs, \& McKnight, 2006) - A minimum of five data points is required to assess a student's response to instruction. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2007; Stecker, 2007) - By collecting progress monitoring data, educators can determine which intervention or types of instruction work best for all students in the class. (Johnson, Mellard, Fuchs, \& McKnight, 2006) Connection to RTI Data-based decision making is a central concept in RTI. School personnel collect screening and progress monitoring data and then base their instructional decisions on these data. The table below summarizes these decisions. Tips for Implementation When using data to make instructional decisions, teachers will often find it beneficial to have guidelines. These should specify what procedures to use when collecting and evaluating assessment data. Factors to consider includ. - The measures to be used to monitor progress and the frequency with which these measures will be administered (e.g., the Vanderbilt Word Identification Fluency probe administered once per week). - The method to be used to evaluate students' response to instruction (e.g., dual discrepancy) - The criterion to be used to define "adequate" response to instruction (e.g., established benchmarks) - The frequency of collecting progress monitoring data to document students' reading performance (e.g., every one to two weeks) - The amount of data sufficient to allow reasonable certainty about instructional decisions. For example, a teacher needs at least five data points to determine whether a student is responding adequately to Tier 1 instruction - The rules to determine the appropriate level of instructional intensity (i.e., tier placement) based on students' progress monitoring data - The number of weeks targeted instruction will be delivered before response to that instruction is evaluated and a tier placement decision is made. For example, a round of Tier 2 might be implemented for 10 weeks. \begin{tabular}{l} Round of Intervention: \\ A set period of time, determined by the school or district, \\ during which an intervention is implemented. Some students \\ may receive more than one round of intervention. \\ \hline \end{tabular} Keep in Mind - School personnel must understand the purpose and intent of data collection. This allows them to more effectively use the data to make various decisions at different times throughout the RTI process. Typically, a school team (e.g., a school support team) is created to interpret students' data and to make tier placement decisions. At least one member of the school team should have expertise related to interpreting data. - Any time a decision is made regarding a student's instructional needs, parents should be involved in the process. - The most effective methods of evaluating a student's response to instruction are examining the rate of growth, the performance level, or both. What the Research and Resources Say... - Progress monitoring probe scores have been shown to be highly correlated with standardized test scores. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2003) - Scores on progress monitoring probes indicate how students are reading compared with other students in their class and with a normative sample of grade-level peers. (Vaughn \& Chard, 2006; Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2006) - Performance level can be used to determine which students are not responding adequately to general education instruction (i.e., Tier 1 instruction) or to targeted instruction (i.e., Tier 2 instruction). (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2006; Good, Simmons, \& Kame'enui, 2001) Tips for Implemntation At the end of a monitoring period (e.g., seven weeks of Tier 1 instruction), the teacher compares a student's performance level to the benchmark specified by the measure being used. To do this, he or she examines the student's graph and calculates the student's average score on the three most recent probes. An indicator used to identify the expected understandings and skills needed for content standards by grade level. - If a student's average score on the last three probes is equal to or greater than the benchmark, the student is responding adequately to instruction. - If a student's score is below the specified benchmark, more intensive instruction is warranted. xample Note: This example is also used on the STAR Sheet "Determining Rate of Growth" for a comparison of two of the methods for evaluating student performance. During the second week of school, Mrs. Haversham administered a universal screening measure to each student in her first-grade classroom. Danisha scored in the bottom ten percent of her class-the criterion that indicates that she may not be responding to instruction. To determine whether or not Danisha was adequately responding to Tier 1 instruction, Mrs. Haversham monitored her progress for ten weeks using Vanderbilt University Word Identification Fluency (WIF) probes. Danisha's progress monitoring graph is shown below. Using that data, Mrs. Haversham calculates the student's average score on the three most recent probes. Mrs. Haversham and the school support team determine that Danisha's performance level is 15wpm, which is below the established ten-week benchmark of 21 wpm. This indicates that Danisha is not responding adequately to instruction and may benefit from Tier 2 instruction. ips for Implementation Universal Screening After administering a universal screening, the teacher determines the performance level of each student by examining his or her scores. To ascertain which students may not be responding adequately to instruction in the general education classroom (Tier 1), the teacher may use one of three methods: - Compare each student's performance level to an established benchmark - Rank order the students and identify the lowest performing students in a class (or in a grade level) - Select a certain percentage of the lowest performing students (e.g., the bottom 20 percent of the class) Tier 1 After monitoring the progress of a student for five to ten weeks in Tier 1 , the teacher will evaluate that student's performance level to determine whether the student needs more targeted instruction (i.e., Tier 2 instruction). In order to do so, the teacher needs to have a criterion with which to compare the student's scores. The criteria for evaluating a student's progress will vary depending on the progress monitoring measure being used. Each progress monitoring measure specifies the benchmarks that indicate an adequate response to intervention for that measure. These criteria also vary for each type of probe and for each grade level. For example, the end-of-year benchmark for the Vanderbilt University Passage Reading Fluency probe for second grade is 75 words read correctly in one minute. Consequently, a student would need to score 75 or above to be considered performing at or above grade level. Tier 2 Teachers can evaluate the performance of a student receiving Tier 2 instruction by examining that student's progress monitoring data. However, it is recommended that teachers use the dual-discrepancy approach to determine whether a student is responding adequately to Tier 2 instruction. To learn more about this approach X What a STAR Sheet is... A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... Rate of growth (or slope) indicates how much a student's reading skills have improved over time. It is usually represented by the slope of a student's graphed scores. What the Research and Resources Say... - The rate of growth is a measure of how many new words a student is learning, on average, each week. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2003) - Teachers can examine the slopes of the students in their classes, compare them with normative expectations for growth, and determine which students are not making adequate progress. (McMaster, Fuchs, Fuchs, \& Compton, 2002; Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2003) - The rate of growth provides a good indication of whether a student will meet an established goal or benchmark (e.g., an end-of-year goal). (Vaughn \& Chard, 2006) - The recommended rate of growth will vary by grade and by probe. (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hintze, \& Lembke, 2007) Tips for Implementation At the end of a monitoring period (e.g., seven weeks of Tier 1 instruction), the teacher should compare the student's slope to the rate of growth specified by the progress monitoring measure being used. A student's slope can be determined with the following pieces of information: - The score on the first probe: y1 - The score on the last probe: y2 - The first administration (e.g., week 1): x1 - The last administration (e.g., week 8): x2 Slope=x2x1y2y1 - If a student's slope is equal to or greater than the specified rate of growth le.g., 1.8 on the first-grade Vanderbilt University WIF probe), the student is responding adequately to instruction. See A below. - If a student's slope is less than the specified rate of growth, more intensive instruction (i.e., Tier 2 instruction) is warranted. See B below. xample Note: This example is also used on the STAR Sheet "Determining Performance Level" for a comparison of two of the methods for evaluating student performance. During the second week of school, Mrs. Haversham administered a universal screening measure to each student in her first-grade classroom. Danisha scored in the bottom ten percent of her class-the criterion indicating that she may not be responding to instruction. To determine whether or not Danisha was adequately responding to Tier 1 instruction, Mrs. Haversham monitored her progress for ten weeks using Vanderbilt University WIF probes. Danisha's progress monitoring graph is below. Using that data, Mrs. Haversham calculates Danisha's rate of growth (i.e., slope). Danisha's Rate of Growth (y2=14) (y1=10)x2x1y2y1=1011410=94=.44 (x2=10) (x1=1) Mrs. Haversham determines that Danisha's rate of growth is .44, which falls below the established criterion of 1.6. This indicates that Danisha is not responding adequately to Tier 1 instruction and may benefit from Tier 2 instruction. ep in Mind Tier 1 Although some teachers may evaluate a student's performance in reading by examining performance level, others prefer to examine a student's rate of growth because it allows them to predict whether that student is going to meet a mid-year or end-of-year benchmark. In addition: - The criteria for evaluating rate of growth vary depending on the progress monitoring measure being used and for each grade level. - Each progress monitoring measure specifies the rate of growth that indicates an adequate response to intervention for that measure. - Teachers and schools can purchase software that graphs and helps to interpret student progress monitoring data. Tier 2 Teachers can evaluate the performance of a student receiving Tier 2 instruction by examining that student's progress monitoring data. However, it is recommended that teachers use the dual-discrepancy approach to determine whether a student is responding adequately to Tier 2 instruction. To learn more about this approach, see Page 22 . What a STAR Sheet is... A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... The dual-discrepancy approach is a met hod that involves evaluating a student's performance level and rate of growth. It is the preferred method for determining whether students are responding adequately to Tier 2 and subsequent tiers of instruction. What the Research and Resources Say... - The use of both criterion, performance level and rate of growth, has been shown to be the most reliable means of distinguishing between students who respond to instruction and those who do not. (McMaster, Fuchs, Fuchs, \& Compton, 2002) - Unlike with the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, the use of both criterion (performance level and rate of growth) to determine academic progress avoids gender bias or the overrepresentation of specific ethnic groups in special education services. (Speece, 2005) - Students who are below the criteria for both performance level and rate of growth are not responding to the high-quality instruction provided and may benefit from more intensive instruction. (McMaster, Fuchs, Fuchs, \& Compton, 2002) Tips for Implementation The dual-discrepancy approach is recommended for evaluating a student's response to Tier 2 instruction and to more intensive levels of instruction. It is important to note that there is no set sequence for the evaluation of performance level and rate of growth. For the purposes of this case study, an order has been imposed on this process (see the steps below) because experience indicates that it is more common for students to meet their performance-level expectations (i.e., benchmarks) than to meet their rate-of-growth expectations (i.e., slopes). In effect, evaluating performance level first might reduce the amount of work teachers undertake to make tier decisions. When evaluating student progress for Tier 2, teachers should: Step 1: Evaluate the performance level for each struggling student - If a student's performance level meets or exceeds the relevant benchmark, the student is making adequate progress (see the table below). - If a student's performance level does not meet the benchmark Go to Step 2. Step 2: Evaluate the rate of growth - If a student's slope meets or exceeds the established rate of growth, the student is making adequate progress (see the table below). . - If a student's slope does not meet the established rate of growth Provide Tier 3 intensive, individualized instruction. cample Andy, a first-grade student, has received Tier 2 instruction for 10 weeks. It is now time for his teacher and the S-team to determine whether he has responded adequately to instruction and to make an instructional placement decision based on his progress monitoring data. Using the dual-discrepancy approach, his teacher first determines his performance level. If Andy's performance level meets or exceeds the relevant benchmark, the team will determine that he is making adequate progress and will either discontinue Tier 2 instruction or provide another round of Tier 2 instruction. If Andy's performance level does not meet the ten-week benchmark, 37 wpm, the team will calculate his rate of growth (i.e., slope). Step 1: Evaluate Andy's performance level Andy's performance level is 34wpm. Because he did not meet the designated ten-week benchmark of 37wpm, his teacher needs to calculate his rate of growth. Step 2: Evaluate Andy's rate of growth Andy's rate of growth is 2.1, which exceeds the established criterion of 1.8. This indicates that Andy is not dually discrepant and may discontinue Tier 2 instruction. Because Andy has not met his benchmark, some teams might decide that Andy would benefit from another round of Tier 2 instruction. A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... Making tier placement decisions is the process in which a school team evaluates a student's progress monitoring data and decides what level of instruction the student needs. The team can decide that the student needs 1) more intensive, 2) less intensive, or 3 ) the same level of instruction. What the Research and Resources Say... - The most reliable way to make a tier placement decision for Tier 2 and beyond is to use the dual-discrepancy approach. (McMaster, Fuchs, Fuchs, \& Compton 2002; Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2007) - The data are compared to pre-established criteria. (Fuchs \& Fuchs, 2006) - Multiple tiers of intervention allow for increasingly intensive interventions. (Vaughn Gross Center, 2003) - A recommended approach to the tier placement process is to create a school team that examines students' data and makes data-based tier placement decisions. (TN Dept of Ed., 2007; Bender \& Shores, 2007) - As members of the RTI decision-making team, parents can offer an additional perspective and contribute to the success of the RTI approach for their child. (Bergeson, 2006) Tips for Implementation One major application of data-based decision making under the RTI approach is to help school personnel make tier placement decisions, of which there are two general types: tier initiation and tier discontinuation. Tier Initiation Process Ieceive Ile I msucilum umy Note: When Tier 3 is special education, an IEP meeting must be held to change or discontinue intervention services. Keep in Mind When they implement the RTI approach, schools should: - Specify the criteria to be used to define "inadequate" response to instruction (e.g., established normative benchmarks). - When a student's data indicate that the student is not making adequate progress in the general education classroom (i.e., Tier 1 instruction), the school team may determine that he or she would benefit from additional targeted instruction (i.e., Tier 2). - When the data for a student who has received one or more rounds of Tier 2 instruction indicate that he or she is now performing at grade level, the student may be able to discontinue Tier 2 instruction and maintain his or her level of performance with Tier 1 instruction only. - School personnel need to be sure that a student has mastered and can maintain the skills acquired during intervention before that intervention is discontinued. - A student may be referred for a special education evaluation at any point in the RTI process. What a STAR Sheet is... A STAR (STrategies And Resources) Sheet provides you with a description of a well-researched strategy that can help you solve the case studies in this unit. What it is... Communicating with parents involves notifying and discussing with them their child's progress and response to instruction. What the Research and Resources Say... - Involving parents in all phases of RTI implementation is one of the keys to its success. Parents bring another perspective to the decision-making process that increases the likelihood that RTI interventions will be effective. (Bergeson, 2006) - Sharing normative standards of performance with parents le.g., the benchmarks or criteria that define responsiveness to instruction) will smooth the process of making tier placement decisions. (Johnson, Mellard, Fuchs, \& McKnight, 2006) Tips for Implementation - The school should establish communication with the parents at the beginning of the school year to explain the RTI process and to provide families with information about the core instruction and instruction at the various levels. - Schools should have procedures in place to ensure that parents are informed of their child's progress at critical junctures (e.g., after the universal screening, before changes in their child's tier placement are made). - Teachers should meet with parents at least once a year for parent conferences. Additionally, teachers should meet with parents when instructional changes are made. - Schools should offer translators (as needed) for written and verbal communication with parents. - Communication with parents is especially important when a student is identified as having some additional need that will be met through a more intense level of instruction (e.g., Tier 2). When meeting with parents, a teacher should focus on specific student needs and bring a graph of the student's progress monitoring data to interpret for the parents. The graph can: - Provide a point of reference for the discussion between the teacher and parents - Present an objective picture of the student's performance - During a parent-teacher meeting, teachers should be prepared to discuss the issues parents typically are interested in: - Their child's progress compared to his or her past achievement - Their child's progress compared to other students - The goals their child is expected to meet by the end of the school year - If a student's slope is equal to or greater than the specified rate of growth le.g., 1.8 on the first-grade Vanderbilt University WIF probe), the student is responding adequately to instruction. See A below. - If a student's slope is less than the specified rate of growth, more intensive instruction (i.e., Tier 2 instruction) is warranted. See B below. kample Note: This example is also used on the STAR Sheet "Determining Performance Level" for a comparison of two of the methods for evaluating student performance. During the second week of school, Mrs. Haversham administered a universal screening measure to each student in her first-grade classroom. Danisha scored in the bottom ten percent of her class-the criterion indicating that she may not be responding to instruction. To determine whether or not Danisha was adequately responding to Tier 1 instruction, Mrs. Haversham monitored her progress for ten weeks using Vanderbilt University WIF probes. Danisha's progress monitoring graph is below. Using that data, Mrs. Haversham calculates Danisha's rate of growth (i.e., slope). Danisha's Rate of Growth (y2=14) (y1=10)x2x1y2y1=1011410=94=.44 (x2=10) (x1=1)