Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Enhancing RtI: Instruction and Intervention by 5JKyctxj

VIEWS: 21 PAGES: 45

									            Enhancing RtI:
            Instruction and
              Intervention
          PowerPoints available at
          www.fisherandfrey.com
          Click “Resources”

          Book available from
          ASCD
Nancy Frey and Doug Fisher
  www.fisherandfrey.com
Purpose of RtI
 An alternative way
 to identify students
 as having learning
 disabilities, making
  sure that students
 who struggle were
 not misidentified as
    disabled when
   different and/or
   more intensive
      instruction
   addressed their
        needs.
A school
improvement
process designed
to ensure that
students receive
the instruction,
intervention, and
support
necessary to be
successful.
    Paucity of
    Research




The majority of RTI research focuses
 on students at the elementary level.
Constrained vs.
Unconstrained Skills

                Phonemic
                Awareness

                Phonics

                Fluency
Constrained vs.
Unconstrained Skills

Comprehension

Vocabulary
    Research
    Questions
As RtI is implemented
in a high school,
1) What happens with
student achievement?

2) How can RtI
interventions
be organized and
delivered in a high
school setting?
     Student
   Participants
444 9-12th graders       8.5% Students
62% free/reduced lunch   with disabilities
15% from military
     families
44% Latino/Hispanic      4% with 504 plans
22% Black
16% Asian
18% White
70% EL students
Outcomes: Schoolwide

     Outperformed state-identified similar
     schools by 11%.

     Student achievement increased 4% on
     state achievement measures.

     Independent auditor noted that the school,
     “… outperforms all [local] schools in the
     percentage of students at or above
     proficiency in ELA and math.” (Audit
     report, June 2009)
 Outcomes: Grade Point Averages
GPAs increased from 2.89 to 3.36, (t=12.58, df=742,
p<.001).
  The largest gains in GPA came from students
 living in poverty and students with disabilities.




• For students living in poverty, average GPA increased
             from 2.26 to 3.12 (t=16.84, df=414, p<.001).
• For students with disabilities, average GPA increased
       from 1.30 to 3.02 (t=7.26, df=61, p<.0001).
Outcomes: Attendance




By the end of the two-year data collection period,
attendance had increased from 90.4% to 95.6%.
Outcomes: Referrals to
          Special Education




   Reduced from 17% referral rate to 3%.
   8.5% had an IEP, compared to county
           average of 11.5%.
   “I used to refer students to special
education when I needed help with them.
Now I have that help, and I am part of that
                  help.”




9th grade English teacher, May 2009
 Response to Instruction
  and Intervention (RtI2)

   Tier 1:
   75+%
                Tier 2:
                10-15%
                          Tier 3:
                          5-10%
Manipulate variables…
Tiers 2 and 3 intervention are not a
Band-Aid…




      …for ineffective Tier 1 instruction.
          What could
          Tier 1 look
Tier 1:         like?
75+%
 Tier 1: Quality
Core Instruction
 Increased productive
 group work (school goal
 was 50% of instructional
 minutes)

 Competency-based
 grading

 Better implementation of
 Gradual Release of
 Responsibility
 instructional framework
 (Fisher & Frey, 2008)
    TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY

                                                                      “I do it”
                Focus Lesson
                    Guided
                                                                          “We do it”
                  Instruction
                                                                                “You do it
                                               Collaborative                     together”

                                               Independent                           “You do it
                                                                                      alone”
                                STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY
     A Model for Success for All Students
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual
release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
The sudden release of responsibility
    TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY

                                                                     “I do it”
               Focus Lesson



                                                                             “You do it
                                                                              alone”
                                                 Independent



                                 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY
  Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the
  gradual release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
  Development.
                                DIY School

TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY
        (none)


                                                                              “You do it
                                                                               alone”
                                                 Independent



                                 STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual
release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY

                                                                      “I do it”
                Focus Lesson
                    Guided
                                                                          “We do it”
                  Instruction
                                                                                “You do it
                                               Collaborative                     together”

                                               Independent                           “You do it
                                                                                      alone”
                                STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY
     A Model for Success for All Students
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual
release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
     Video available to Principal Leadership
   subscribers at www.principals.org/pl0910frey




September 2010 issue
  Feed forward to
improve programmatically
          Item Analysis in Science
a) It gets its food from   Does not understand that nutrients are
     the soil.             manufactured internally by the plant.
Misconception
b) It turns water and air Understands that food is manufactured
into sugar.               internally, but does not understand that
Oversimplification        water and the carbon dioxide (from the
                          air) are used to make sugar and oxygen.
c) It has chlorophyll to Does not understand that some parasitic
produce food.             plants do not contain chlorophyll.
Overgeneralization
d) It adds biomass        Correct answer
through
photosynthesis.
What could Tier 2
   look like?
     Tier 2:
     10-15%
Tier 2
  Schedule Intervention
     to Supplement,
      Not Supplant
    Core Instruction
 Tutorials
 Academic Recovery
 Progress monitoring and
 assessments (did not exist
 prior to study)
Manipulate
the variables
Access to
Expertise
Time and Duration
Increased guided   instruction
with smaller   groups
Group size
Assessments
  & Screening tools
  CBMs 1-2 times per month
for progress monitoring




     Cloze assessments
     Oral fluency measures
     Timed math exercises
     Timed writing
Error                         Period 1   Period 2   Period 3   Period 4   Period 5
Mid-sentence capitalization   JC                               AA


Colons and semicolons         JC, JT,    EC,                   AA,        HH, DP,
                              AG, DL,    MV,                   SK,        MR, CH
                              TV         WK                    MG,
                                                               EM,
                                                               BA, TS
Ending punctuation            JC, AG,    WK,                   AA, BA     MR
                              SL         MW
Subject-verb                  JC, JT,    RT, VE,               AA,        DP, DE
                              DL,        VD, CC                MG,
                              MM,                              SC,
                              SL, ST,                          PM, LG
                              ND
Tense - consistency           DS         SJ, JM                AA,        DE
                                                               TR, PC
Spelli ng                     JC, MM     WK,                   AA,        SR, DC,
                                         RT, AG,               MG,        MF
                                         SJ                    BA,
                                                               GL, PT,
                                                               DO,
                                                               DE, LR
Supporting evidence           JC, JT,    EC, SJ                AA,        DE, MR,
                              MM                               MG,        DC, AT
                                                               BA,
                                                               GL, PT,
                                                               DO,
                                                               DE, LR,
                                                               SK,
                                                               EM,
                                                               TS, LG,
                                                               PM,
                                                               DP, RT,
                                                               HA, KJ,
                                                               DE,
                                                               RC,
                                                               DW,
                                                               DL, KS,
    Video available to Principal Leadership
 subscribers at www.principals.org/pl0211fisher




February 2011 issue
What could
Tier 3 look
    like?
    Tier 3:
    5-10%
 Tier 3: Intensive Interventions


Did not exist at the beginning of the study

1:1 instruction

By end of second year, every certificated
adult had provided individualized
instruction to at least one student
Keep the teacher
at the center of
communication
Daily 1:1 instruction
Analytic writing samples
Vocabulary CBMs

Increased Progress Monitoring
with specialized assessments
Every certificated adult
meets with students
    TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY

                                                                      “I do it”
                Focus Lesson
                    Guided
                                                                          “We do it”
                  Instruction
                                                                                “You do it
                                               Collaborative                     together”

                                               Independent                           “You do it
                                                                                      alone”
                                STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY
     A Model for Success for All Students
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual
release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
                 The Takeaway
             The Takeaway

• Instruction and Intervention are linked
• Manipulate variables (time, assessment,
  expertise, instruction) to intensify intervention
• Build in a feed forward method so that RtI2
  results inform classroom instruction and
  programmatic improvements
• Keep the teacher and family at the center of
  communication

								
To top